►
From YouTube: Select Committee on Blockchain, Financial Tech. & Digital Innovation Meeting, November, 18, 2022-AM
Description
No description was provided for this meeting.
If this is YOUR meeting, an easy way to fix this is to add a description to your video, wherever mtngs.io found it (probably YouTube).
A
C
C
E
E
Think
that
there's
a
lot
of
potential
to
be
had
here
and
I
think
it's
as
much
about
the
substance
of
the
of
of
the
policy,
as
well
as
sending
the
message
to
the
industry
to
these
apis
that
hey,
you
know
we're
welcoming
and
combined
with
some
of
the
the
banks
that
we
do
have
here.
These
these
Speedy
Banks
and
these
other
digital
asset
institutions
I.
Think
that
there's
just
a
lot
of
potential
I,
almost
kind
of
view
this
Aiken
to
2018-2019.
C
F
Office,
thank
you.
Mr
chairman
and
I
apologize
to
everybody
for
my
voice.
Today
it
doesn't
seem
to
work
like
it's
supposed
to,
but
it'll
hopefully
hold
out
we'll
see.
We
did
have
an
opportunity,
through
the
last
minerals
committee,
to
work
the
bill
that
was
recommended
and
forwarded
from
our
committee
to
the
minerals
committee.
As
as
the
committee
will
recall,
banking
bills
have
to
be
forwarded
to
the
minerals
committee
by
our
original
charter
legislation.
F
So
in
our
last
meeting
we
recommended
forwarding
our
draft
legislation
that
we
worked
with
the
division
of
banking
on
that
went
to
the
minerals
committee
and
it
did
pass
the
minerals
committees.
So
the
minerals
committee
is
sponsoring
our
bill
unamended
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
so
as
we
last
saw,
that
is,
that
is
how
it
left
and
effectively.
That
was
a
an
allowance
for
open
banking,
which
we
all
kind
of
agreed
was
already
probably
allowed.
F
So
it
effectively
holds
the
open
for
business
sign
up
and
then
puts
and
builds
that
regulatory
structure
that
we
talked
about
last
time
around
it
so
that
once
again,
hopefully
we'll
be
a
leader
in
that
space
and
others
can
be
looking
to
Wyoming
for
how
to
engage
in
open
banking
practices.
If
we
are
successful,
foreign.
C
G
Committee
Scott
Meyer
on
behalf
of
the
Wyoming
Bankers
Association
I,
think
Senator
Roth
was
get
a
great
summary
of
what
happened
up
at
minerals,
one
of
the
things
that
was
brought
up
and
I
and
I
had
to
kind
of
smile
on
myself.
Just
because
the
way
that
the
timing
was
but
our
Senator
Rothman
said,
we've
got
to
do
something.
Nobody
in
the
feds
has
done
anything
for
12
years.
By
the
time
I
got
home.
There
was
a
notice
out
that
the
cfpb
is
now
taking
this
on.
G
G
I
will
tell
you.
The
cfpb
is
required
to
convene
a
small
Business
Review
panel
to
consult
with
representatives
of
small
businesses
likely
to
be
affected
by
the
regulations
of
the
agency
and
those
actions
that
they're
taking
considering
the
panel
will
prepare
a
report
on
the
input
from
the
small
entities
which
the
cfpb
will
consider
as
it
develops
all
its
proposed
roles.
G
All
I
can
tell
you
at
this
point
in
time
is
that
the
WBA
and
our
members
are
fully
supportive
of
consumers
ability
to
access
and
share
their
financial
data
in
a
secure
and
transparent
manner
that
gives
them
control
the
consumers.
Today,
Banks
data,
aggregators
and
other
technology
companies
are
collaborating
to
build
tools.
G
I
think
that
are
that
move
away
from
less
secure
methods
like
screen
sharing
and
to
these
more
secure
apis
that
we've
talked
about
and
I
think
that
that
protects
and
empowers
consumers,
as
we
have
stayed
at
prior
hearings,
I
think
our
biggest
concern
is
access
to
Consumers
data
that
we
believe
must
be
held
to
the
high
same
high
standards
and
supervision
related
to
data
security
that
banks
are
required
to
do
so.
We
look
forward
to
working
with
this
this
committee.
F
I'll
note
I
appreciate
that
update.
One
thing
that
we
discussed
briefly
was
that
obviously
the
cfpp
product
is
something
that
then
our
division
of
banking
can
draw
upon
when
drafting
rules
and
regulations.
If
we
end
up
passing
the
legislation-
and
that's
pretty
handy
so
they've
been
working
on
it
for
the
past
12
years
and
haven't
actually
finalized
anything.
F
But
it's
a
nice
feature
that
they
have
a
lot
of
the
framework
effectively
built,
and
it's
just
that
nobody's
pulled
a
trigger
on
it
and
then
from
a
workload
standpoint
and
talking
with
the
division
of
banking.
We
could,
if
we
choose
to
set
some
high-level
policies
like,
for
example,
Express
written
consent
was
what
we
included
as
opposed
to
just
you
know:
click
box,
opt-in,
something
like
that
was
one
of
the
provisions
that
we
did
include
as
a
minimum
requirement.
F
We
can
work
to
set
those
robust
requirements
and
then
utilize
the
work
products
so
far
of
the
Consumer,
Financial,
Protection,
Bureau
and
once
again,
hopefully
leading
this
in
this
space
and
Mr
Meyer
I,
don't
know
if
you
have
any
any
new
information
from
last
time,
but
one
of
the
things
that
we
talked
a
little
bit
about
at
the
minerals
committee
was
what
is
the
likely
timeline
of
them
taking
formal
action?
Do
you
have
any
more
information
on
on
what
a
likely
timeline
would
be
for
that.
G
Yes,
Mr
chairman
I
I
will
tell
you
that
I
think
that,
with
rules
comments
being
issued
by
the
into
January,
we'll
see
something
in
2023
as
far
as
Drafts
come
out
and
I
think
that
that
will
push
it
I
think
the
goal
right
now
is
to
have
it
in
2024
and,
as
we
kind
of
discussed
in
minerals,
I
think
our
biggest
concern
is,
and
it's
really
it,
and
it's
really
none
of
my
problem.
It's
just.
G
We
observe
it
but
dictating
that
the
division
of
banking
come
up
with
rules
that
all
of
a
sudden.
Now
they
have
to
change,
because
you
know
our
banks,
a
lot
of
the
institutions
are
FDIC,
so
we
have
to
follow
Federal
rules,
I
mean
it's
just
requirements,
so
it'd
be
a
shame
for
them
to
come
out
and
do
something
that
also
ultimately
gets
changed,
but
I
can't
imagine
that
they
wouldn't
be
too
much
on
the
same
page.
I
think
they're
pretty
much
are.
E
F
H
C
C
G
C
I
I
I
I
Well,
we
were
at
the
testified
at
the
minerals
committee
and
moving
forward
we'll
make
similar
updates
on
that
bill.
Moving
forward,
one
of
the
things
I
did
want
to
update
you
on
was
at
our
last
meeting.
The
question
was
brought
up
of
kind
of
going
through
an
analysis
of
what
are
the
divisions
options
if
we
were
to
be
or
see
a
surge
and
spdi
applications.
I
I
At
that
time,
I
I
mentioned
that,
with
our
current
resources,
we
could
realistically
review
one
official
application
at
a
time
and
that's
what
spurred
this
analysis
and
so
I
just
want
to
give
an
update
on
that
so
I
kind
of
want
to
go
through
what
our
current
process
is
for
reviewing
applications
and
then
going
to
possible
things
that
we
could
do
to
basically
process
more
than
we
are
now
so
currently,
we
are
our
processes.
We
we
meet
with
a
company
who's
interested
in
this
space.
I
We
have
we
set
up
a
meeting
with
the
people
involved
in
the
company,
maybe
their
general
counsel.
We
go
over
their
high
level.
What
their
business
plan
is
products
and
services
and
most
of
the
time,
that's
when
we
give
them
feedback
of
just
what
the
spdi
is
and
does
it
fit
for
their
purposes
from
there
if
they
want
to
move
forward,
we
ask
them
to
give
us
a
draft
written
business
plan.
We
we
go
through
that.
I
We
have
a
kind
of
a
standard
list
of
questions,
but
we
also
depend
on
what
what
products
they're
getting
into.
We
provide
questions
and
feedback,
and
then
we
kind
of
go
back
and
forth
a
number
of
times.
This
could
take
several
months.
It
just
depends
on
the
company
and
it's
the
quality
of
that
business
plan.
This
is
when
we
really
flesh
out
how
complex
is
this
institution
and
kind
of
where
are
they
in
the
process?
Is
this
more
than
they
need?
Is
it
maybe
a
trust
company
charter?
I
I
By
that
point,
we
found
that
if
a
company
were
to
just
give
us
an
official
application
without
us
looking
at
it,
it
would
there
might
be
some
questions
that
would
put
them
in
maybe
in
a
Thai
spot
in
front
of
the
banking
board.
So
we've
this
draft
review
process
is
very
helpful.
One
thing
this
also
does
is
it
allows
us
to
look
at
more
than
one
application?
I
Obviously,
we
might
have
multiple
draft
business
plans
at
one
time
we
can
kind
of
prioritize
which
one's
ready
to
go
faster
and
get
through
that
bottleneck
of
one
application.
At
a
time
we
found
that
actually
works
fairly
well
for
us
and
I
think
our
companies
are
the
feedback
we've
gotten
as
they
appreciate
that
process.
I
So
what
I
want
to
do
is
just
kind
of
walk
through
the
possibilities.
This
is
I.
Think,
like
the
the
scenario,
is
we
get
a
lot
of
applications
all
at
once,
I
think
the
direct
question
last
time
was,
if,
if
it
looks
like
our
spdis
might
be
getting
a
master
account
at
the
Federal
Reserve
and
we
get
100
applications.
What
do
we
do
so?
A
couple
things
we
can
do.
One
is,
we
can
add
positions,
this
would
need
to
be.
I
I
F
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman,
commissioner.
On
that
point,
one
of
the
concerns
that
has
been
expressed
in
the
past
that
we've
worked
with
is
the
fact
that
the
Sal
reschedule
for
some
of
these
positions
is
inconsistent
with
the
market,
and
that
makes
it
challenging
to
bring
in
people
at
the
appropriate
skill
experience
level
to
do
the
work
is.
Is
that
still
the
case?
Do
we
have
any
solutions
on
the
horizon
to
remedy
that?
I
Bishop,
yes,
thank
you
Mr
chairman.
Yes,
it
is
still
the
case.
However,
we've
we've
made
some
requests
in
the
last
month
to
hopefully
help
remedy
this.
It
may
not
get
us
fully
where
we'd
like
to
be,
but
it
will
definitely
help.
We
currently
have
a
b11
submitted
and
I
think
we'll
be
making
a
supplemental
request
at
the
next
session
to
help
with
this.
F
And
it's
my
understanding
that
the
revenue
is
available
based
on
the
structure
of
the
division
of
banking,
where
it's
a
fee
service
model.
So
the
appropriation
side
from
the
financial
standpoint
is,
is
not
the
concern.
It
is
the
authorization
for
the
positions,
as
well
as
the
classification
of
those
positions
so
that
they
can
be
paid
sufficiently
to
meet
the
market.
Is
that
an
accurate
assessment.
I
Yes,
thank
you.
Mr
chairman
co-chairman,
yes,
I,
think
that's
an
accurate
assessment
and
we
do.
We
are
another
fund
agency.
We
do
bring
in
fee
Revenue
to
pay
for
our
cost.
I'd
say
currently
the
attitude
and
with
our
institutions
is:
they
are
willing
to
pay
higher
fees
if
it
means
better.
Employee
retention
on
our
side,
they've
been
doing
a
very
good
job
of
making
that
known,
it
does
still
have
to
go
through
the
Appropriations
process,
even
though
it
is
other
Revenue.
I
I
Commissioner
Bishop,
yes,
thank
you
Mr
chairman,
yes,
I,
I,
think
the
assumption
is
right.
Now
the
existing
Forest
pdis,
none
of
them
currently
have
a
master
account.
I
think
the
worry
is
that
if
one
of
them
is
Grants
and
a
master
account
I
think
that'd
be
great
for
their
business.
However,
I
I
think
that
would
bring
in
a
lot
more
interest
from
the
industry
in
an
spdi,
Charter
and
I
I.
Think
if
that
were
to
happen,
I
think
we
would
expect
an
increase
in
potential
applications.
F
And
just
following
up
on
that
anecdotally,
there
are
companies
very
interested
in
the
Speedy
Bank
Charter,
but
without
the
master
account
availability,
they
haven't
pursued
them
and
so
they're
they're
waiting
on
the
outcome
of
that
circumstance.
So
it
would
be
reasonable
for
a
surge
who
knows
how
big
that
surge
actually
is
to
occur
if
the
master
account
circumstances
resolved.
I
Yes,
I
think
that
I
think
that's
an
accurate
statement
so
kind
of
moving
on
our
another
option
that
we
could
do
if
we
were
to
see
a
search,
and
that
would
be
to
contract
with
a
third
party
to
basically
process
these
applications
for
us
and
for
that
process.
We'd
have
to
go
through
the
very
well
established
RFP
process.
The
estimated
time
frame
for
this
approval
is
it
varies.
It
can't
give
you
an
exact
deadline
or
a
timeline
on
this,
but
we
we'd
probably
expect
roughly
six
months
to
get
through
that
approval
process.
I
I
So,
once
that
approval
process
goes
through,
we
could
select
the
institution
that
we
would
like
to
partner
with
to
handle
these
these
applications,
and
then
they
could
actually
begin
helping
with
this.
So
I
just
want
to
wrap
things
up.
Just
if
this
were
to
happen.
What
would
we
do
given
these
options?
I
I
I,
think
if,
for
example,
we
all
know
if
a
current
spdi
gets
a
master
account
and
at
that
point
we'll
be
receiving
a
lot
of
interest
from
the
industry,
we'll
be
having
a
lot
of
scheduled
meeting,
so
it
won't
be
a
day.
One
applications
on
our
desk,
hopefully
not
anyways,
and
so
we
we
would
be
able
to
see
it
coming.
We'd
be
having
a
lot
more
of
those
initial
meetings.
I
We'd
be
looking
at
a
lot
more
of
those
draft
business
plans,
and
so
that
would
actually
give
us
a
few
months
to
start
this
other
process,
and
so
as
once,
we
saw
that
comp
that
coming,
we
would
immediately
try
to
at
least
fill
any
any
making
positions
we
currently
have
just,
hopefully
that
we
hoping
we
could
get
somebody
in
place.
That
is
qualified.
I
However,
given
that
that's
not
a
a
given,
we
would
then
start
that
RFP
process
at
that
time
and,
while
still
moving
as
many
of
those
applications
forward
as
we
could
and
I
think
we,
we
would
definitely
utilize
that
draft
review
process.
That
would
really
help
us
I
will
say
when
the
spdi
legislation
first
passed
in
2019,
it
was
effective,
October
1st,
we
expected
a
lot
of
applications,
October
1st
it
actually
took
several
months
and
we
were
able
to
spread
those
out
at
that
time.
I
C
K
Oh
Joel
go
ahead.
Thank
you.
Mr
chairman
I,
just
question
for
the
commissioner,
and
that
is
with
the
outsourced.
Temporary
solution
is
the
is
the
man
are
the
man
hours
required
for
approval
greater
than
for
ongoing
oversight
in?
In
other
words,
would
would
you
not
need
the
resources
to
to
regulate
the
approved
species
down
the
road
anyway?
I
Bishop,
yes,
thank
you
Mr
chairman,
thank
you,
Mr,
everyone
yeah!
It's
a
good
question,
I.
Think
our
going
through
that
RFP
process
with
that
third
party
contractor
would
be
the
immediate
solution
to
that
problem.
However,
we
would
probably,
if
we
see
a
large
number
going
through
and
it's
likely
that
those
companies
would
possibly
receive
a
charter.
E
Maybe
if
you
get
outlined
roughly
what
that
timeline
would
be
in
terms
of
both
and
because
I
mean
we're
not,
this
is
an
unskilled
labor
we're
looking
for
these
are
folks.
Obviously,
after
a
pretty
deep
knowledge
of
this
process,
you
know,
let's
say
if
this
master
account
situation
does
get
resolved
and
all
of
a
sudden
there
is
the
flood
that
we've
kind
of
been
discussing.
What
would
that
process?
E
I
I
This
is
a
rough
approximation,
six
months
to
get
through
the
RFP
process,
and
so
we
would
be
handling
it
with
the
resources
we
currently
have
and
then
at
that
point
we'd
also
be.
You
know
at
that
same
time
day.
One
we'd
also
possibly
if
needed,
go
through
the
process
of
adding
positions
and
that's
the
one
it's
just
it
could
be
six
months.
F
Actually
got
a
question
for
representative
Stith
and
I
know:
Appropriations
has
talked
a
little
bit
about
a
I
and
their
categorization
for
position,
descriptions
and
and
classifications,
not
just
for
division
of
banking,
but
I.
Think
for
well
a
gas
Conservation,
Commission
and
some
other
areas
is.
Is
there
any
movement
or
anything
going
on
right
now
with
Appropriations
that
that
might
lead
to
new
classifications,
new
flexibility,
something
that
addresses
these
concerns?
Representatives.
G
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
Scott
and
Meyer
on
behalf
of
the
Wyoming
Bankers
Association
I
just
want
to
make
a
I
guess
an
editorial
that
I'll
throw
out
there
based
upon
what
the
commissioner
just
made
a
comment
on.
You
know,
just
in
general
terms,
we
we
not
only
expect
but
we're
demanding
of
the
division
of
banking,
some
excellence
in
their
examiners.
It
makes
banking,
you
know
what
it
is.
It
makes
Wyoming
what
it
is,
and
so
we've
had
those
discussions.
G
We
need
to
have
the
examiners
that
make
us
look
good,
and
you
know,
without
getting
too
far
into
the
weeds
I
mean
we
all
heard
a
little
bit
about
FTX
and
Mr
SPF
and
I've
heard
comments
from
Senator
Lomas
and
even
comments
from
your
Committee
Member
Caitlin
Long
about
that
stuff.
But
the
reality
is
it
comes
down
to.
Is
that
we're
only
as
good
as
The
Regulators
we
have,
and
if
we
want
to
look
like
we
would
be
we're
the
top
dogs
which
I
think
we
are.
G
F
Co-Chairman
office-
and
we
did
out
of
this
committee-
pass
a
bill
a
number
of
years
ago
about
three
years
ago,
I
think
too,
to
address
that
and
the
bill
passed
the
legislature,
the
governor
vetoeded
and
said
that
he
effectively
addressed
it
and
take
care
of
it,
which
is
the
source
of
the
concern
that
I
have.
Is
we
here?
We
are
a
couple
of
years
later
and
I.
Don't
feel
that
we're
fully
staffed
from
what
I,
understand
and
I
think
the
reason
that
we're
not
fully
staffed
is
because
we
are
not
paying
fair
market
wage.
F
So
you
know
we
look
forward
to
continuing
to
work
with
you
to
try
and
address
that,
because
absolutely
it's
not
just
about
Speedy
Banks,
it's
about
the
Integrity
of
the
entire
Financial
system
in
the
state
of
Wyoming.
We
have
to
have
high
quality
Regulators
with
experience
we
have
to
have
enough
of
them.
We
have
to
do
good
work
because
we
do
tout
the
fact
that
these
circumstances
that
we've
seen
recently
wouldn't
occur
had
they
been
regulated
in
Wyoming
and
I.
F
G
Other
comment,
Mr,
chairman
and
co-chairman
rothfuss-
is
that
you
know
we
talk
about
in
this
committee
and
in
other
committees,
Economic
Development
and
the
legislature
did
pass
a
bill
that
allowed
people
to
move
their
charters.
Now,
I
I'm
fully
expect
to
try
to
push
on
that
to
see
what
we
can
do
to
make.
People
want
to
have
them
move
their
Charters
to
Wyoming.
We
have
a
great
track
tax
structure.
We
have,
you
know
great
laws
that
support
the
financial
industry,
but
this
is
a
key
part.
So.
L
So
I
would
just
remind
you
that
there
are
fees
coming
in
the
traditional
Banks.
Do
not
pay
those
fees
they
are
exempt.
That's
the
industry.
That's
been
in
the
case
for
a
long
time.
They
don't
even
pay
the
two
basis
points
to
the
Secretary
of
State's
office,
the
traditional
Banks.
Don't
the
special
purpose.
Depository
institutions
do
pay
the
two
basis
points,
but
do
pay
it
into
the
division
of
banking.
L
There
is
not
a
tip
over
provision
like
in
the
division
of
banking,
like
there
is
with
the
secretary
of
state,
but
the
funding
alleviation
could
actually
happen
in
Theory
fairly
quickly.
If,
if,
if
operating
businesses,
unlike
custodial
bank,
which
is
not
yet
operating
well,
we
have
our
Charters
activated,
but
we're
not
yet
Revenue
generating
Revenue
we're
not
operating,
but
Kraken.
Bank,
of
course,
would
be
right
because
they're
an
operating
business
right.
L
So
there
are
scenarios
in
which
the
revenues
come
in
fairly
quickly,
but
I
just
wanted
to
flag
that,
because,
let's
remember
why
we
did
this.
In
the
first
place,
there
was
ultimately
a
desire
to
get
more
funding
into
the
division
of
banking.
It's
been
blocked
by
the
feds
and
so,
but
but
there's
also
the
the
prospect
I
know
Appropriations
to
representative
stiff's.
Earlier
comments
have
looked
at
when
and
if
those
revenues
do
come
in
is
there
a
tip
of
a
provision?
L
A
A
C
A
A
F
F
M
A
F
C
C
M
What
this
build
draft
did
and
again
this
was
2020
Senate
file
140
for
anybody
listening,
it
amended
section
131605
by
creating
a
new
paragraph,
dealing
with
obligations
or
what
the
banking
board
can
do,
and
it
provides
that
the
banking
board
shall,
except
for
the
salary
of
the
commissioner
as
otherwise
provided
by
Statute.
It
shall
establish
Personnel
classifications
and
salaries
for
the
division,
a
banking
subject
to
legislative
appropriation.
Those
salaries
were
to
be
commensurate
with
other
state
and
federal
financial
regulators
and
the
specialized
skills
required
to
supervise
because
Speedy,
Banks
and
financial
technology.
C
M
So
the
the
enrolled
version
did
include
requirements
for
reporting
to
the
Joint,
Appropriations,
Committee
and
and
and
reporting
to
them
what
those
classifications
and
salaries
would
be
and
that
they
include
those
in
the
Department's
exception
budget
and
then
section
two
provided
that
no
increase
in
any
person's
salary
or
revision
to
the
personal
classifications
require
an
increase
in
the
expenditure.
Funds
shall
be
effective
until
approved
by
the
governor.
M
M
Express
concerns
to
the
the
duties
of
the
joint
Appropriations
Committee
were
a
little
unclear
expressed
concerns
that
the
banking
division,
employees
being
members
of
the
executive
branch.
His
preference
was
that
that
those
remain
with
the
Department
of
a
I
and
it
didn't
like
the
procedures
that
were
established
in
the
Senate
file,
for
he
felt
the
rights
that
those
were
cumbersome.
Procedures
for
the
division
of
banking
to
make
those
recommendations
to
the
banking
to
the
board
and
I
think
those
kind
of
highlight
the
concerns
that
he
had.
M
C
Yeah
pick
another
one:
Senator
Furby
Senator
furfy
the
as
I'm
looking
at
this
bill.
This
is
a
good
bill.
We
we
definitely
want
to
advance
this
bill
in
the
session.
However,
this
committee
cannot
Advance
this
bill
because
it
is
a
title
13
bill.
It
will
have
to
go
through
minerals
and
minerals
has
already
had
its
final
meeting,
so
unfortunately,
our
committee
won't
be
able
to
sponsor
it
because
it,
it
won't
have
had
time
to
go
through
minerals,
but
I
think
we
should
bring
this
as
an
individual
bill.
Yeah.
F
C
C
G
We
support
that
kind
of
an
effort
that
Senator
Murphy
had
brought
up.
We
will
do
everything
we
can.
We
understand
that
commissioner
Bishop
has
he's,
got
certain
restraints
on
what
he
can
and
can't
do.
We
have
had
that
conversation
with
Governor
Gordon.
He
understands
the
importance
and
I
think
he
will
be
very
willing
to
work
with
us
at
this
point
because
he
understands
where
we're
coming
from
and
why
we
need
this.
So.
C
F
Know
one
of
the
other
concerns
was
just
sort
of
the
the
idea
of
well.
If,
if
we
provide
this
opportunity
for
the
division
of
banking,
then
everyone's
going
to
ask
for
the
ability
to
set
their
own
salaries-
that
is
something
for
us
to
to
think
through,
but
the
challenge
that
I
have
with
that
argument
is:
if
we
do
things
right
for
one
agency,
why
should
we
you
know,
then
we'll
have
to
do
things
right
for
the
rest
of
the
agencies,
isn't
as
compelling
when
phrased
that
way.
F
So
this
isn't
it's
a
much
larger
problem,
but
certainly
our
responsibility
is
to
address
these
particular
concerns
and
and
within
our
scope
as
we
contemplate
it,
though,
potentially
for
a
individual
bill
that
that
hopefully
many
of
us
will
sponsor
during
this
session.
Maybe
there
is
a
broader
solution,
so
if
everyone
wants
to
try
and
think
that
through
then
yeah.
C
I'm
kind
of
on
the
same
page
as
you
I'm
I'm
interested
to
have
the
broader
discussion,
because
you
know
we
also
have
this
issue
with
our
treasurer's
office
and
our
investors
yeah
and
our
advisors.
So,
just
in
my
time
in
my
short
time
here
in
the
legislature,
it
seems
to
be
surfacing
more
and
more
I'm,
definitely
interested
in
a
broader
conversation
as
well.
Mr.
C
C
A
C
C
A
N
Chairman,
thank
you,
so
I
I
don't
think
we
actually
had.
So
what
what
had
happened
at
the
last
meeting
was
that
there
was
a
motion
to
have
a
Bill
draft,
which
is
the
next
draft
on
our
agenda,
plus
a
committee
or
a
working
group
discussion
in
between
meetings,
I
think
in
the
Whirlwind
of
the
election
season.
That
didn't
quite
happen.
Unfortunately,
but
I
I
know,
Mr
Mayor
had
comment
that
he
had
emailed
to
us.
N
C
K
K
O
My
my
pleasure
I'm
delighted
to
be
here
and
it's
a
pleasure
to
talk
to
all
of
you
and
it's
really
great,
to
see
the
women
legislature
being
so
forward.
Thinking
in
in
this
area
and
thanks
especially
to
Mr,
reveal
of
Corp
for
inviting
me,
we
had
a
nice
conversation
a
while
back,
where
we
kind
of
discussed
some
legislative
possibilities
that
Wyoming
might
look
at
in
the
kind
of
blockchain
nft
space
in
relation
to
State
intellectual
property
law
that
might
be
both
Innovative
and
productive.
O
The
reality
is
the
state
trademark
law
is
not
as
not
as
powerful
in
a
lot
of
ways
as
as
Federal
trademark
law,
although
I
do
think,
there's
room
for
innovation
in
in
that
area,
and
it
might
very
well
be
looking
at
I
I.
Think
the
the
area
where
there's
the
most
potential
for
Meaningful
impact
would
be
in
state
writer.
O
Publicity
laws
in
part,
because
Wyoming
doesn't
currently
have
a
statutory
right
of
publicity
law,
unlike
many
other
states,
although
not
not
all,
all
states
have
them,
but
that
does
seem
like
to
me.
It
seems
like
a
an
interesting
opportunity
to
think
about
what
a
law
like
that
might
look
like
and
how
it
might
explicitly
recognize
the
kinds
of
interests
that
people
with
celebrity
value
to
their
personalities
might
have
in
in
the
nft
space
and
as
as
Mr
reveal
mentioned.
P
Q
I
would
like
to
say
at
this
juncture
that
I
completely
agree
and
I
do
believe
that
also
having
worked
on
the
registered
digital
asset
legislation
that
we'll
be
talking
about
later
on
today
that
what
is
going
to
be
needed
is
a
few
different
kinds
of
bills.
So
we
actually
have
the
registered
digital
asset
act
specifically
for
IP,
but
as
I'll
discuss
later,
it
is
come
to
our
understanding
that
things
of
the
nation
that
we're
talking
about
here,
which
is
really
related
to
Identity
right
personas
influencers.
Q
All
this
stuff
identity
is
going
to
require
separate
legislation
merely
for
the
fact
that
we
can't
burden
the
Court
of
Chancery
with
billions
of
dispute
dispute
cases.
Regarding
you
know,
low
value
registered
digital
assets
that
are
you
know
not
worth
challenging
in
the
Court
of
Chancery,
and
also
the
cost,
is
too
much
300.
You
can't
have
everybody's
digital
identity,
where
they're
paying
300
for
each
hdid,
so
it
is
going
to
take
some
thinking
this
through
as
a
separate
piece
of
legislation.
That's
what
I
have
to
say
right
now.
N
A
N
A
K
O
C
N
Q
This
for
later,
but
it
might
fit
better
here,
nope
go
ahead.
Yes,
so,
oh
ideally,
you
know
what
what
what
I
would
like
to
see
is.
You
know,
instead
of
having
a
a
blue
check
mark
for
digital
identity,
representative
Olson
I
know
that
you've
put
forth
in
the
past
the
buck
and
writer
as
a
you
know,
symbol
or
something
that
should
be
registered
as
a
digital
identifier,
registered
digital
identifier
and
that's
kind
of
what
the
same
thing
we
need
here.
Q
If,
if
you
know
you
had
people
willing
to
spend,
you
know
eight
dollars
a
month
for
their
blue
check,
mark
for
digital
identity,
and
you
have
300
million
people
across
the
country
and
eight
dollars
a
month.
That's
2.8
billion
dollars
so
somewhere
between
zero,
which
is
what
you're
getting
right
now
and
2.8
billion
dollars
is
probably
something
that
the
Secretary
of
State
might
find
out
interesting.
Q
C
Any
questions
for
Brendan
committee,
nope,
okay,
I,
do
think
I
do
think
this
is
on
our
if
we
can
at
least
just
make
a
note.
So
we
don't
forget
about
this
when
we
come
back
around
to
setting
interim
topics
lso
if
you've
got
to
start
compiling
that
list,
that's
helpful
for
now.
Okay,
thanks,
everyone.
R
R
Think
most
people
would
agree
with
that
and
he
likened
it
to
the
era
in
the
90s.
When
Congress
was
drafting
legislation
to
determine
whether
the
internet
would
be
a
decidedly
American
Endeavor
or
if
we
would
allow
all
that
Innovation
and
opportunity
and
revenue
to
Offshore,
and
he
noted
that
you
know
he
was
very
grateful
to
be
part
of
the
solution
in
getting
that
right.
R
As
many
of
you
know,
if
something
like
one
to
two
percent
of
assets
under
management
from
these
firms
moved
to
bitcoin
or
similar
digital
assets,
we
would
see
we
would
most
likely
see.
Bitcoin
surpass
six
figures
in
value,
at
least
that's
in
accordance
with,
what's
been
noted
by
many
Finance
experts.
R
None
of
this
should
be
a
surprise
to
the
committee.
This
is
a
legislative
committee.
That's
helped
lead
to
the
creation
of
one
of
the
most
Innovative
regulatory
Frameworks
in
the
world
for
blockchain
and
web3,
and
that
is
the
reason
that
truck
coin
swap
is
Incorporated
in
Wyoming
and
that's
the
reason
that
we
are
creating
made
in
Wyoming
Solutions
in
a
two
trillion
dollar
domestic
supply
chain
industry
that
is
now
converging
with
blockchain
right
here
right
now.
R
R
R
R
So
how
does
all
this
translate
in
real
time
and
in
order
to
kind
of
make
the
point
I
want
to
run
through
a
couple
supply
chain
statistics
that
impact
or
are
impacting
all
of
our
families
and
friends
and
colleagues.
Next
week,
85
percent
of
Americans
cannot
afford
to
spend
200
on
Thanksgiving
next
week.
R
R
R
R
So
I
want
to
give
you
a
simple
example:
you
own
a
hundred
trucks
and
have
an
internal
settlement
department,
but
a
majority
of
your
shipper
customers
pay
on
90-day
terms.
If
inflation
is
12
a
year
and
I
think
most
of
us
would
disagree
with
Washington's
nine
percent
figure
and
again
turkey
costs
are
up
73
year
over
year.
R
But
if
your
pay
terms
are
90
days,
then
every
month
of
waiting
creates
a
one
percent
loss
in
your
invoice
value
over
30
days.
You
lose
three
percent
in
the
value
of
that
invoice,
but
it's
worse
because
you're
also
payrolling
a
settlement
department,
so
restated
in
many
instances
a
larger
trucking
company
is
currently
paying
more
to
settle
its
invoices
than
what
a
single
truck
operator
is
paying.
R
R
Instead
of
advancing
cash,
TCS
settles
transportation
companies
in
tcs's
polygon
token
minted
right
down
the
road
in
Laramie
at
settlement.
The
current
dollar
value
of
TCS
token
is
directly
deposited
into
the
trucking
company's
digital
asset
wallet
where
it
can
then
immediately
can
be
sold
and
converted
back
to
US
Dollars,
avoiding
both
factoring
costs
and
crypto
volatility.
R
Truck
coin
swap
launched
TCS
token
on
two
major
exchanges
in
September
at
the
University
of
Wyoming's
blockchain
stampede
and
is
now
working
with
larger
exchanges
like
coinbase,
Kraken
and
binance.
To
get
the
token
onboarded
further
two
weeks
ago,
TCS
launched
its
mobile
and
web
app
to
20
000
attendees
at
the
freightwave's
future
Freight
conference.
R
The
demo
concluded
to
thunderous
Applause
and
TCS
has
been
approached
by
Transportation
strategics,
representing
access
to
More
Than
3
million
American
trucking
companies
working
with
these
strategics
TCS
is
now
charged
with
demystifying,
crypto
and
blockchain
to
the
industry.
However,
but
for
this
committee,
no
part
of
this
Innovation
would
have
happened
in
Wyoming
and
I
would
argue.
It
may
not
have
happened
at
all.
Wyoming's
done
a
tremendous
job
of
building
a
neighborhood
for
companies
like
TCS
and
I
want
to
turn
that
topic
over
to
Phil
and
Jake
for
a
little
more
discussion.
T
T
He
spoke
to
over
20
blockchain
Venture
Capital
funds,
so
Philip
has
been
building
businesses
and
software
for
over
30
years
he's
very
familiar
with
the
technology
startup
space
and
every
fund.
He
spoke
to
naturally
asked
where
truck
coin
swap
is
based
and
when
he
told
them
Wyoming
every
fund
he
spoke
to
was
surprised.
T
Wyoming
has
yet
to
Market
itself,
to
the
startup
world
to
technology,
startup
companies
and
Venture
companies.
The
committee
has
done
the
hard
work
of
writing.
The
laws
and
we've
also
started
creating
a
community
with
events
like
crypto
Mondays
conferences
like
the
blockchain
Stampede
and
more
to
come,
but
blockchain
companies
building
here
won't
get
far
without
funding
and
the
startup
World
Is
Still,
unaware
of
what
Wyoming
has
accomplished.
So
I
want
to
turn
it
over
to
Phil
to
talk
about
some
potential
Solutions.
S
It
would
be
an
awesome
thing
if
you
know
there
are
other
states
that
have
gone
out
and
marketed
various
different
things
usually
to
tourism
and
it's
very
expensive,
but
this
is
a
different
kind
of
a
marketing.
Ask
that
we
actually
go
out
and
Market
specifically
to
the
people
that
can
influence
new
startup
companies.
This
is
Venture
funds.
This
is
Angel
groups
and
there
are,
as
a
small
Target
out
there
to
Market
to
to
say
you
know
what
we've
actually
built
something
really
special
in
this
state.
S
If
we
do
this,
so
that's
really.
The
ask
that
we
have
is
I
shouldn't
be
going
out
there
and
hearing
well.
Why
would
you
want
to
build
in
Wyoming
and
what?
What
attracts
you
to
Wyoming?
That's,
not
what
you
should
be
hearing.
You
should
be
hearing,
oh
yeah,
you're
in
Wyoming.
That's
a
good
thing!
That's
why
you
should
be
building
on
where
you
should
be
building.
S
S
Yeah
we'd
be
interested
in
hearing
this
and
you
call
them
up
talk
to
them
and
say
here's
our
new
things
that
we're
doing
here's,
how
it
will
benefit
the
companies
that
you're
working
with
here's,
the
stuff
that
we're
providing
so
the
the
VCS,
the
Angels,
the
funding
people
can
talk
to
the
companies
that
they're
working
with
and
say,
yeah
we're
looking
at
what
you're
doing.
But
you
shouldn't
be
in
some
State
out
there.
You
should
be
a
Wyoming
company.
A
S
This
wouldn't
be
just
for
us.
I
would
suggest
that
you
actually
contact
the
major
Venture
funding
organizations
and
that
you
basically
advertise
the
legal
framework
that
you've
already
built
in
the
state
to
the
Venture
funding
companies
that
you
advertise
it
to
the
angel
groups,
not
just
in
Wyoming
but
throughout
the
United
States
that,
if
they're
going
to
fund
somebody
that
those
companies
really
should
be
Wyoming
based.
F
Yeah
and
I
appreciate
the
point:
I
see
the
point
that
I
I.
This
would
be
something
for
the
Wyoming
Business
Council
to
effectively
prioritize
and
that
that
is
one
of
the
roles
and
responsibilities
obviously
is
to
try
and
drum
up
business
for
Wyoming
get
businesses
located
here
and
we've
heard
similar
concerns
before
where
Dows
are
a
great
example.
We
have
dial
legislation,
we
have
the
entire
framework
to
support
decentralized
autonomous
organizations.
We've
got
legal
definitions
for
property
in
the
state
of
Wyoming
associated
with
digital
assets.
F
We
have
everything
you
need
to
effectively
run
a
dow,
most
Dows
are
still
Incorporated
in
Delaware,
and
they
don't
even
look
right.
It's
just
where
do
we?
Where
do
we
incorporate
the
answer?
Delaware,
okay,
we'll
incorporate
in
Delaware
the
fact
that
they
don't
have
any
legal
framework
to
effectively
address
how
a
Dao
would
would
settle
transactions
that
that
is
seemingly
of
no
consequence.
F
Marketing
is
not
something.
Wyoming
does
very
well
honestly,
and
we
don't.
We
don't
put
a
lot
of
resources
towards
it.
It
is
one
of
the
reasons
why
Delaware
leads:
they
have
a
marketing
budget
for
corporations
and
even
Nevada
markets.
The
hell
out
of
their
corporations,
Division
and
I-
think
we
outperform
Nevada,
but
we
just
don't.
We
don't
Market
to
it.
F
So
the
the
discussion
before
had
focused
more
on
how
do
we
get
attorneys
that
are
working
with
companies
to
incorporate
to
recognize
Wyoming's
strengths
in
this
space,
but
I
think
the
tact
that
you're
bringing
is
is
an
interesting
one
that
is
worth
chatting
with
Business
Council
a
lot
because
I
don't
think
they've
done
it,
which
is
well.
It's
not
just
the
attorneys
that
make
that
decision.
It's
literally
the
angel
and
investors
and
the
series
a
folks
and-
and
you
know,
early
Capital
investors
that
helped
to
Shepherd
and
I.
F
Think
that's
a
strong
point,
so
I'm
happy
to
bring
that
message
to
Business
Council,
follow
up
with
them
and
start
the
conversation
I
think
it's
a
really
good
one.
They
they
should
have
the
resources
all
ready
to
do
that,
honestly,
not
to
say
they
would
accept
more
resources.
They
always
seem
to
be
willing
to
accept
an
appropriation
if
offered,
but
I
I
think
even
just
prioritizing
that
so
we
will
follow
up
on
that.
I
will
follow
up
on
them.
Foreign.
R
R
Now
that
was
more
of
a
government-to-consumer
type
proposition,
but
if
the
state
of
Wyoming
could
kind
of
you
know,
maybe
focus
on
a
theme,
that's
specific
to
institutional
investors,
attorneys
folks
in
that
space,
I
think
it
could
do
a
great
deal
in
terms
of
advancing
not
just
the
the
value
proposition
that
the
state
has
created
from
a
regulatory
perspective,
but
but
driving
in
that
Revenue.
That
I
think
everybody
in
Wyoming
wants
to
see.
Mr.
F
Chairman
quick
follow-up,
the
interesting
thing
here
is-
and
this
is
what's
very
different
from
trying
to
find
all
the
attorneys
in
the
country
and
get
a
message
to
them-
is
what
you're
suggesting
is
it's
like
a
hundred
people
or
so
200
people
would
be
meaningful
if
you
had
a
targeted
marketing
campaign.
Yes,
for
that
many
people
that
are
known
to
to
be
working
on
venture
capital
in
this
space
or
or
active
in
this
space,
which
honestly
should
be
very
achievable
even
from
a
saturation
standpoint,
we
should
be
able
to
hit
him
pretty
hard.
F
Yeah,
so
I
do
have
a
question
getting
getting
back
a
little
bit
to
Jake
and
I
met
prior
to
the
the
last
big
presentation
at
the
the
National
Group
for
this
Trucking
industry.
Can
you
give
us
a
little
bit
more
detail
on
kind
of
how
that
went?
You
said
that
it
was
Applause,
but
I'd
just
like
to
hear
anecdotally
a
little
bit
more
about
what
the
path
forward
looks
like
as
a
result
of
the
the
connections
you
probably
made
there.
R
Sure
that's
a
great
question,
so
we
obviously
get
a
number
of
questions
about
adoption
you
know
are:
are
the
trucking
companies
really
going
to
be
able
to
figure
out
how
to
take
settlement
in
a
crypto
wallet
and
then
get
back
to
USD?
Liquidity
is
the
will
there
is?
Is
the
Acumen
there?
The
interesting
thing
that
we
found,
though,
is
you
know
you
you
think
about
a
lot
of
these
truck
drivers
they're
in
a
cab
eight
hours
a
day,
especially
during
covet?
R
They
heard
all
of
the
ads
for
coinbase
and
for
Kraken,
and
a
number
of
them
have
dipped
their
toes
and
they
probably
have
a
better
understanding
of
crypto
in
the
aggregate
than
most
of
the
American
public.
I
I
would
argue.
The
value
proposition
for
the
industry,
though,
is
tremendous,
though,
because
if
we
go
back
to
that
single
owner
operator
that
that
person
can
recapture
potentially
up
to
20
to
30
000
dollars
a
year
in
net
revenue,
I
think
the
industry
average
for
a
truck
driver
right
now
is
about
sixty
thousand
dollars.
R
So
you're
talking
about
potentially
a
50
increase
in
annual
salary
using
a
blockchain
solution,
as
opposed
to
you
using
the
banking
or
intermediary
Solution.
That's
out
there
now,
so
we
have
been
approached
we.
We
continue
to
be
in
beta
with
the
carriers
that
we
have
in
our
beta
program,
we'll
be
in
beta,
most
likely
through
the
end
of
the
year.
R
Our
future
customers,
they're
working
with
three
million
of
these
customers
and
they're
looking
to
they're
looking
at
ways
to
integrate
with
us
directly
because
they
want
their
customers
to
be
able
to
share
in
the
value
proposition.
That's
you
know
has
not
been
available
in
the
market
until
now,
so
we're
very
excited.
We
have
a
lot
of
work
to
do
clearly,
but
we're
excited
and
looking
forward
to
the
challenges.
F
And
we
I
always
ask
this
of
of
new
company
startups
to
present
to
us
any
barriers
that
we
need
to
be
looking
at,
that
that
the
state
of
Wyoming,
for
example,
has
created
holding
you
back
slowing
you
down
that
that
maybe
we
could
consider
revising
or
or
improving
anything.
We
need
to
do
anything
on
that.
Gentlemen.
R
R
We
were
advised
that
the
cost
on
that
went
up
to
two
thousand
dollars,
so
not
that
that's
a
huge
problem,
but
for
a
number
of
startups
who
are
looking
for
a
favorable
jurisdiction
to
incorporate
in
I
think
if
there
is
a
way
to
to
mitigate
some
of
those
front-end
costs,
I
think
that
that
will
make
the
state
even
more
attractive.
Okay,.
F
U
F
C
C
M
The
first
thing
committee
May
notice
the
staff
comment,
which
highlights
a
couple
of
important
things.
Primarily,
it
outlines
the
differences
between
this
version
of
the
bill
and
the
version
that
the
committee
has
seen
in
September
and
then
some
potential
considerations
that
the
committee
may
wish
to
look
further
at
so
just
walking
through
those
changes.
M
The
first
one
is
that
the
well
I'm
going
to
take
it
a
little
bit
out
of
order
it
does
allow.
This
version
of
the
draft
now
allows
for
the
an
agent
of
the
lawful
owner
to
register
and
not
just
the
lawful
owner
and
that
kind
of
leads
into
one
of
the
considerations
further
down
the
road
for
the
committee
is:
should
there
be
any
restrictions
on
that
agent?
Should
it
require
it
to
be
a
registered
agent
as
drafted?
M
This
simply
provides
that
nothing
in
this
article
should
be
construed
to
confer
any
ownership
property
or
other
rights
related
to
digital
assets,
Beyond
those
specifically
granted
in
this
article.
This
was
kind
of
some
cautionary
language
that
was
added
pursuant
to
some
conversations
that
I
had
specifically
with
Christopher
Allen
and
Brendan
Marr.
It
may
not
be
necessary,
but
just
kind
of
there,
for
the
committee's
consideration
and
to
try
and
limit
you
know
anybody
attempting
to
expand
the
rights
or
or
being
unclear
as
to
what
those
are
on
page.
M
N
F
You
David
on
that
last,
the
the
phrasing
of
it
you
know
that
obviously
gets
into
our
UCC
concept
of
digital
asset
ownership.
What
up
would
we
interpret,
or
would
it
be
interpreted
that
that
is
unique
control?
I
think
this
is
something
we
talked
through
before
about.
If
three
of
us
control
have
control
over
it,
we
all
effectively
have
joint
ownership
based
on
kind
of
the
digital
asset.
F
Concepts
I
think
that's
how
you
laid
that
out
to
interpret
I'm
really
getting
at
just
making
sure
that
this
phrase
is
consistent
with
the
way
that
we
did
things
in
the
UCC
digital
asset
legislation.
Any
concerns
there
I
mean
I,
think
it's
fine
I,
think
you
don't
have
to
have
unique
control.
You
have
to
be.
You
have
to
have
control
on
that
based
on
a
digital
asset
law
should
make
you
an
owner
of
it,
but
not
necessarily
a
unique
owner.
Is
that
kind
of
how
we're
intending
that
to
be
read?
Mr
Hopkinson
thank.
M
M
F
M
Next
change
is
a
new
subsection
D
on
page
six,
if
the
applicant
has
a
registered
agent
pursuant
to
that
would
be
the
registered
agent
statute.
The
lawful
owner
of
the
digital
assets
shall
provide
the
information
required
and
we'll
get
to
that
later
on
in
the
bill,
but
this
is
just
essentially
would
require
the
lawful
owner,
if
he's
using
a
registered
agent,
to
provide
certain
information
to
that
registered
agent.
M
Another
significant
changes
at
the
bottom
of
page
six
in
paragraph
a
or
subsection
a
this
would
allow
upon
the
filing
of
a
complete
application
for
registration
and
payment
of
registration
fee.
The
application
shall
be
deemed
approved
and
the
digital
asset
registered.
Pursuant
to
this
article,
one
of
the
requests
the
committee
made
was
to
have
kind
of
the
process,
be
a
little
more
automatic
and
and
discretionary
for
the
Secretary
of
State.
M
If
they
wanted
to
take
a
further
look
at
an
application
they
could
and
these
changes
would
allow
for
that
that
it
would
be
deemed
approved
and
registered.
Unless
the
secretary
has
stated,
his
discretion
causes
the
application
to
be
examined.
Pursuant
to
those
oh
yeah,
the
paragraphs
there
and
those
are
the
same
as
were
in
the
previous
bill,
that
that
the
secretary
can
request
additional
information
and
and
have
kind
of
a
dialogue
with
the
applicant
and
ultimately
reject
it.
Q
M
In
the
3429
206,
we
did
eliminate
in
the
original
version.
There
was
the
option
for
assignment
of
the
bill
and
also
an
option
for
change
of
name
that
this
version
eliminates
the
option
for
a
change
of
names
that
seem
to
be
incorporated
already
by
assigning
the
right
to
another
individual,
and
so
that
section
now
just
provides
for
the
assignment
of
the
right
to
another
person
or
of
the
of
the
registered
asset.
The
registration
to
another
person.
F
F
M
M
The
lawful
owner,
or
the
name
and
physical
address
and
business
telephone
number
of
a
natural
person
who's
authorized
to
receive
Communications
from
the
registered
agent
on
behalf
of
that
lawful
owner
and
a
copy
of
the
written
contractor
agreement.
Creating
that
agency
related
relationship
between
the
registered
agent
and
a
natural
person
with
respect
to
accepting
service
of
process
on
behalf
of
each
lawful
owner
represented
by
the
registered
agent.
M
Some
considerations
for
the
committee,
then
that
I
just
wanted
to
highlight
again
going
back
to
should
just
be
a
registered
agent.
Should
the
registered
agent
have
additional
obligations.
For
example,
one
thing
that
came
out
in
discussion
was
perhaps
requiring
a
registered
agent
to
verify
the
lawful
owner
and
fact
has
control
of
a
digital
asset.
M
So
that's
a
policy
question
for
the
committee,
as
drafted.
I
would
note
that
the
application
does
require
whoever
applies
to
assert
that
or
to
have
a
statement
in
there
that
the
lawful
owner
has
control
of
the
digital
asset.
So
in
a
sense
that
may
be
a
condition
as
drafted
so
again,
policy
consideration
for
the
committee.
They
want
them
to
have
to
do
that
or
not,
but
that
would
apply
to
any
agent.
Who
is
doing
that
not
just
to
a
registered
agent.
M
One
other
area
again
for
the
committee
is,
is
whether
a
registered
digital
asset
applies
just
to
a
a
single,
unique
digital
asset
or
if
it
should
apply
to
a
kind
of
a
basket
of
digital
assets.
I
do
think
that
may
be
a
little
unclear
as
drafted,
given
that
in
Wyoming
statutes,
plural
can
be
singular
and
vice
versa.
M
M
It
does
not
spell
out
what
specific
information
would
be
kept
and
that's
in
3429
207
newly
created
the
committee
Mayors
wish
to
consider
specifying
what
information
could
be
kept
there
and
then,
finally,
just
to
note
again
that
this
draft
would
waive
the
fifty
thousand
dollar
minimum
threshold
in
order
to
be
heard
in
the
Chancery
Court,
and
so
as
drafted.
The
Chancery
Court
would
need
to
hear
issues
related
to
registered
digital
assets,
regardless
of
their
value
again.
Policy
question
for
the
committee
to
consider
with
that.
J
Mr,
chairman
Mr,
Hopkins
and
I
think
this
question
may
be
similar
to
my
question
at
the
last
meeting
and
I
haven't
made
any
advance
in
my
education
or
understanding
of
it
Can.
What's
the
what's
a
concrete
example,
if
you
can
think
of
one
where
you
know,
this
would
be
really
useful
for
someone
to
be
able
to
register
a
digital
asset,
is
it
going
to
be
I,
don't
know
like
Nike's
virtual
sneakers,
nfts
or
something
or
when?
Is
it
going
to
make
sense
to
do
this
sort
of
where's?
M
Thank
you,
Mr,
chairman
representative,
stiff
as
drafted.
The
primary
value
is,
is
seen
in
3429
202a,
that
for
purposes
of
Wyoming
law
and
any
federal
law,
that's
not
in
contradiction.
The
asset
would
be
deemed
to
be
located
within
the
state
of
Wyoming.
So
what
you're
really
getting
is
access
to
Wyoming's
courts
and
particularly
potentially
the
access
to
the
to
the
Wyoming
Chancery
Courts
for
a
swifter
resolution
you
know,
so
it
really
only
applies
to
when
there's
a
question
or
or
where
the
location
of
the
asset
is
a
concern.
F
F
It
seems
that
we
have
a
pretty
good
infrastructure
built
around
the
concept
of
a
registered
agent.
It's
understood
how
that
works,
and-
and
maybe
we
need
to
modify
that
moving
forward
at
some
point
for
digital
assets
better,
but
at
least
we've
got
a
good
construct.
People
understand,
do
you
have
any
ideas?
F
What
else
would
an
agent
be
I
mean
it
sounds
like
it
could
just
be
anybody
acting
on
anyone
else's
behalf,
which
might
then
be
a
little
bit
confusing
and
I
don't
even
know
how
you
would
then
track
down
if
you
needed
to
serve
process,
you
could
get
several
layers
deep
in
this.
Do
you
did
you
see
a
value
or
or
have
maybe
anyone
else
in
the
Committees,
see
a
value
at
this
time
of
us
going
with
agent
as
opposed
to
registered
agent?
So.
C
J
J
You
know,
get
its
registered
agent
on
the
phone,
so
I
think
limiting
it
to
the
registered
agent
to
me
would
be
problematic.
I.
Think
agency
is
a
pretty
well
developed
idea.
That's
really
not
ambiguous.
It's
people
can
dispute
about
whether
you
really
are
the
agent,
of
course,
but
I
think
it
would
go
up
the
process
to
restrict
this
to
registered
agents.
C
So
you
see
I
just
don't
again.
Maybe
we
could
ask
the
Secretary
of
State
what
they
think
this
would
look
like,
but
I
would
Envision
again
there's
a
there's
a
form
and
if
I'm
most
likely
Nike,
you
know
Nike's,
president
isn't
going
to
submit
the
form
he's
going
to
hire
he's
going
to
have
an
attorney
who
just
collects
his
signature
on
the
form
and
submits
the
form
right
so
where's.
C
The
scenario
where
you
would
you
would
want
what
I'm
concerned
about
is:
if,
if
you
have,
if
you're
specifically
allowing
for
an
agent
to
cancel,
then
this
the
Secretary
of
State
when
it
receives
a
form,
that's
signed
by
somebody
else?
How
is
it
going
to
know
if
that
person's
the
owner
or
the
agent
they're
not
going
to
know,
there's
going
to
be
a
signature
on
a
piece
of
paper
right.
J
Mr,
chairman,
yeah,
well
I
think
we
already
have
that
issue
in
the
law.
If
you
do
a
UCC
termination
statement
right,
for
example,
or
UCC
filing
right
now,
we
don't
require
that
the
registered
agent
of
the
corporation
is
the
only
one
who
can
do
that.
Anyone
within
the
company
is
authorized
to
do
that,
and
theoretically,
it's
possible
for
someone
to
fraudulently
file
a
UCC,
make
a
UCC
filing
or
fraudulently
try
to
terminate
a
UCC
statement.
J
I,
don't
think
I
mean
I
think
that
problem
of
malfeasance
and
fraud
is
not
one
that
we
can
solve
here
and
I
think
it
would
be
Overkill
too
restricted
only
to
a
registered
agent.
Because
then
you
have
the
other
question
of
well.
Is
this
person
who
says
they're
acting
on
behalf
of
the
registration?
Are
they
really
authorized?
I
mean
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
we
need
to
I
think
the
language
works
as
it
is
yeah.
F
Well,
I
would
say
that
it
I
I,
think
the
intent
would
never
to
be,
would
not
be
only
a
registered
agent,
it
would
be
the
owner
or
the
registered
agent
for
the
Nike
example
that
you
mentioned,
if
you're
signing
as
the
owner
effectively,
which
is
what
you
would
be
doing
right,
you
would
be.
You
would
be
Nike
signing
that
if
you
had
Authority
within
Nike
to
sign
off
on
the
termination,
then
you're
the
owner,
signing
it
acting
on
behalf
of
the
corporation.
F
C
Would
it
portray
would
that
person
be
able
to
portray
themselves
as
the
owner?
Would
it
be
evidence
that
they
are
the
owner?
Would
they
think
that
they're?
You
know
I
I've
seen
this
with
with
llc's,
because
we
allow
an
incorporator
to
file,
so
anyone
can
file
who's,
not
actually
the
owner
of
the
company.
It's
the
incorp,
the
incorporator
can
be
a
complete
third
party,
essentially
and
I've,
seen
confusion
where
an
incorporator
believes
that
they
they
own
the
company
because
they
signed
that
document.
C
And
then,
when
and
then
when,
when
you
go
to
the
Secretary
of
State's
office,
they
don't
know
who
signed,
they
don't
know
who
who
has
Authority.
They
just
have
a
form
with
a
with
a
signature.
So
this
this
provision
of
the
statute
How.
Would
how
would
you
ever?
How
would
you
check
the
cancellation
you
wouldn't
it
says
it
can
only
be
canceled
by
the
lawful
owner?
There's
just
no
check
then,
because
the
Secretary
of
State's
office
is
going
to
probably
accept
any
document,
that's
signed
period.
F
F
The
inventors
well
you've
got
an
inventors
list
and
then
you've
got
an
assignment
owners
list,
and
then
you
also
then
have
attorneys
just
making
filings
on
that
where
there
is
and
on
behalf
of
authentication
process
so
to
some
degree,
there's
a
registration
but
obviously
they've
got
a
pretty
detailed
and
built
out
system
there,
but
that
that's
how
that
operates.
So
you
have
a
series
of
different
I
mean
same
thing
with
a
registered
digital
asset.
We
are
going
for
ownership,
but
there
actually
is
a
Creator
side
of
it.
F
B
C
Yeah
yeah,
my
position
is
it
does
it
doesn't
have
to
say
agent
I
think
that
agency
law
already
covered
is
already
covered
there
without
it.
Unless
that's
what
I'm
saying
unless
it
expressly
prohibits
an
agent
from
signing
it
I,
don't
think,
there's
I,
don't
think,
there's
anything
in
the
statute
when
it
says
a
lawful
owner
that
would
prohibit
me
as
a
lawful
owner
from
giving
the
authority
away
to
whomever
through
an
instrument
to
file
on
my
behalf,
I
think
you
could
already
do
that.
I
think
it's
fine
to
leave
it.
A
P
Install
yourself,
that's
all
right,
Carl
Allred,
Secretary
of
State.
Thank
you
thank
you.
They
usually
do
that
and
I'm
sorry
I
forgot
hey
as
we
get
started
on
this.
You
know.
I've
got
a
few
thoughts,
but
Deputy
wheeler
has
got
a
pretty
comprehensive
information.
She'd
like
to
present
so
I
would
defer
to
her
at
this
time.
U
You
Mr
chairman
Mr
co-chairman
members
of
the
committee
Karen
wheeler
deputy
secretary
of
state,
first
of
all,
I'd
like
to
thank
Mr
Hopkinson
for
his
revisions
on
the
bill.
He
did
incorporate
the
Amendments
that
we
had
requested
at
the
last
meeting
and
I
greatly
appreciate
it.
Mr
chairman.
The
concern
that
we
have
in
our
office
is
when
you
bring
the
registered
agent
into
it,
so,
first
of
all
being
able
to
Define
what
an
agent
is
versus
a
registered
agent.
U
If
you're
going
to
use
both
those
terms
in
this
legislation,
our
customers
will
get
confused
because
they
will
see
agent
and
registered
agent
and
think
they
are
one
and
the
same
so
I
would
just
say.
Maybe
if
you
can
find
another
term
for
agent,
so
there
is
not
confusion
with
our
customers
or
a
representative
or
something
so
first
of
all,
I
think
in
reading,
through
this
to
incorporate
a
registered
agent
in
here
to
be
an
applicant
again
given
confusion
that
I
know
we'll
see
from
our
customers.
U
If
the
intent
is
the
registered
agent,
be
a
Wyoming
registered
agent.
I
think
you
should
state
that
in
here,
because
I
can
see
a
customer
who
is
not
familiar
with
Wyoming
law
thinking.
Oh
I've
got
a
registered
agent
in
Nevada
I'll.
Just
have
him
do
this,
so
if
your
intent
is
that
it
is
a
Wyoming
registered
agent,
I
think
that
we
should
clarify
that.
U
Additionally,
as
you're
looking
at
having
a
registered
agent,
be
the
applicant
I
think
it
might
be
helpful
to
understand
our
registered
agent
industry
in
Wyoming.
So
as
of
this
morning,
right
before
I
came
down,
we
have
589
commercial
rep
commercial
registered
agents.
They
represent
more
than
10
business
entities.
U
So
based
on
the
patterns
that
we
see
with
entity
filings
in
our
office,
I
think
it
is
very
highly
likely
that
if
the
registered
agent
is
the
applicant,
it's
going
to
be
one
of
your
commercial
registered
agents,
so
they
won't
really
have
the
tie
to
the
owner
like
I.
Think
the
intent
is
so
I
just
want
you
to
be
aware
that
that's
probably
what
we're
going
to
see
additionally.
U
So,
for
instance,
when
an
entity
forms
with
our
office,
they
must
submit
a
consent
that
the
registered
agent
has
signed
and
the
registered
agent
consents
to
be
their
registration
agent
when
they
file
online
and
the
majority
of
our
filings
are
online
as
soon
as
our
system
sees
that
consent.
It
automatically
sends
an
email
to
the
registered
agent.
Did
you
consent
to
be
the
registered
agent
for
this
entity?
U
U
So
if
we
don't
have
those
same
Provisions
for
the
digital
asset,
given
that
more
than
likely
it's
going
to
be
one
of
your
commercial
registered
agents
that
files
as
the
applicant
I
think
you
need
to
maybe
tighten
that
down.
If
the
registered
agent
has
given
consent
to
be
the
applicant
or
that
the
owner
has
given
consent
for
to
use
the
registered
agent.
U
U
C
Deputy
wheeler
as
to
the
registered
agent
versus
the
Wyoming
registered
agent,
is
it?
Is
it
sufficient
enough
that,
in
in
1728
101
for
a
registered
agent,
we
Define
it
as
I'm
a
resident
someone
who
resides
in
the
state
or
would
it
just
be?
If
that's
not
sufficient
I
suppose
we
can
just
reference
back
a
registered
agent
as
defined
by
because
I
don't
think
we
use
the
terminology
Wyoming
registered
agent
anywhere.
We
just
Define
it
as
a
as
as
reside
as
the
person
or
entity
residing
in
Wyoming
is
that
is
that
accurate.
U
M
J
Stiff
Mr
chairman
Deputy
wheeler,
on
page
six
of
the
bill
lines
11
through
14..
We
have
the
provision
that
says
if
the
applicant
is
a
registered
agent,
the
lawful
owner
Etc.
In
your
view,
would
it
be
cleaner
and
simpler
to
just
delete
lines
11
through
14
and
delete
the
other
references
about
registered
Agents
from
the
bill
and
just
have
the
bill
say
if
you're
an
applicant,
you
know
you
have
to
be
the
owner
or
an
agent
of
the
owner
and
just
leave
it
at
that.
Would
that
just
be?
Would
that
be
simpler?
U
F
Do
you
see
different
challenges
and
different
problems
as
a
result
of
that,
or
do
you
see
that
being
a
streamlined,
effective
solution
that
achieves
what
I
mean
you?
You
know
what
our
objectives
are
here
and
we're
obviously
trying
to
make
it
as
business
friendly,
user,
friendly
and
and
agency
friendly
as
possible.
So
is
that
just
a
different
series
of
train
wrecks
or
what
are
your
thoughts,
Deputy
wheeler
thank.
U
You
Mr
chairman,
Mr
co-chairman,
so
keep
in
mind
first
and
foremost
business
filings
in
our
office.
Our
role
is
ministerial
only
so,
if
you
remove
all
this
and
you
leave
it
just
as
the
agent
it's
ministerial,
we
file,
what
is
required
to
be
on
the
application
where
it
gets
complicated
is
when
you
bring
in
that
registered
agent
component
to
it,
because
it
affects
then
what
a
registered
agent
does
so,
for
instance,
the
language
on
page
six
that
we
just
referenced.
C
U
P
So
yeah
again,
that's
up
to
you
guys,
which
way
you
want
to
go
with
it.
There's
advantages
on
both
sides,
but
I
I
agree
that
if
you're
going
to
take
it
out
and
just
allow
agent,
then
I'd
remove
that
section
on
page
six
and
and
then
in
in
that
case,
if
you
do
that,
then
you
can
remove
all
of
the
additions
to
1728
107.
P
C
A
P
Couple
more
questions
like
say
that
that
one's
up
up
to
how
you
guys
want
to
deal
with
it,
but
I
I
would
concur
with
the
lso's
recommendation
the
reference
to
the
Chancery
Court,
the
way
it's
written
right
now,
it's
wide
open
I
mean
it
could
be.
Small
claims
could
go
into
that
and
bog
up
that
chance.
I
I
would
leave
if
you
don't
want
to
have
50
000,
but
that
you
put
at
least
some
reasonable
amount
in
there,
not
just
a
just
a
thought
that
recommendation
from
the
lso
on
that.
P
P
Now,
I
I
would
think
that
it
might
be
better
to
go.
No
other
person
has
a
valid
ownership
claim
because
they
may
own
that
digital
asset,
but
they
don't
have
it
registered.
This
is
kind
of
new,
registering
these
digital
assets
and
it
just
just
a
thought
there
that
maybe
you
go
to
a
valid
ownership
claim
versus.
You
know
that
they're
signing
that
statement,
because
I
may
know
that
you
may
not
have
it
registered,
but
it's
yours
and
I'm
going
to
go
register
it.
So
just
a
thought
and
any
other
questions.
H
J
U
U
P
C
C
J
Chairman
I
think
it's
a
good
suggestion.
If
this
is
going
to
cost
money,
let's
be
upfront
about
it:
let's
go
ahead
and
appropriate
the
money
and
just
have
it
be
general
fund,
because
Secretary
of
State's
office
doesn't
right
now
really
have
special
Revenue
accounts.
It
just
all
goes
to
the
general
fund.
There's
a
certain
transparency
to
that.
F
P
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
one
other
thing.
As
Deputy
wheeler
mentioned,
there
is
the
the
cost
of
building
this
to
do
it,
but
just
also
just
to
throw
a
little
Tickler
in
your
mind
that
the
employees
in
our
office
are
overworked
strapped.
This
will
increase
that
and,
quite
frankly,
to
increase
the
workload
that
we
have
and
and
I
appreciate
comments
that
were
said
about
throwing
some
more
work
our
way,
but
we
need
some
more
employees.
P
If
we're
going
to
be
doing
this,
they
are
they're
completely
bogged
down,
I
mean
as
far
as
what
they
have
the
they're
getting
the
work
done
today.
But
if
we're
going
to
increase
that
it
is,
you
know
and
I
hate
to
say
anything
about,
you
know,
increase
you
guys
know
me.
I,
increasing
the
size
of
government,
it'd
be
the
last
thing
I
ever
say,
but
the
workload
would
have
to
be
managed.
C
U
Mr
chairman
I,
would
love
to
say
one
two,
three
four
of
them,
but
I,
don't
know
the
volume
we're
going
to
get
right.
I
mean
this
is
new
and
and
I
will
and
thank
you
secretary
already
greatly
appreciate
it.
Our
business
division
is
11
people,
okay
and
I'm.
Just
gonna
give
you
an
idea.
I
have
some
stats
for
you,
because.
U
We
go
so
just
I
always
tell
you
how
many
llc's
we
have
formed
at
the
end
of
when
I
tell
you
your
stats.
Just
from
July
1st
to
November
15th
we've
had
almost
41
000
brand
new
llc's
formed
now,
while
the
majority
of
them
are
online
and
that
is
efficient
for
our
customers.
It
creates
a
huge
workload
on
the
back
end
for
all
of
our
registrars
in
there.
U
In
addition
to
the
4
000
phone
calls
they
personally
answer
each
month
in
addition
to
all
the
voicemails,
they
return
in
addition
to
the
five
email
accounts
that
they
personally
respond
to
and
and
in
addition
to
the
117
000
paper
filings
they
do
a
year
so
with
the
workload
right
now.
Yes,
it
is
heavy,
they
are
buried.
U
C
U
F
U
U
Last
time
there
was
357
yeah,
you
are
up
to
484..
There
are
now
98
inactive.
Last
time
there
were
28..
Okay,
so
of
the
98
inactive
21
were
administratively
dissolved
for
failure
to
file
the
annual
report.
One
was
administratively
dissolved
for
failure
to
maintain
a
registered
agent.
Eight
chose
to
dissolve
themselves.
U
A
U
Your
series
LLCs,
we
have
877
active
series,
we
had
859
in
September,
so
we've
gone
up,
the
877
represent
14
752
established
series
of
the
inactive
we
have
255
inactive
192
did
not
file
any
reports.
41
filed
articles
of
disillusion
19
did
not
maintain
a
registered
agent.
Two
foreign
series
llc's
withdrew
and
one
transferred
to
another
state.
I
gave
you
the
LLC
statistics,
and
still
as
of
today,
we
have
51
utility
tokens
filed
and
14
of
those
were,
since
the
new
fee
went
into
effect.
Q
C
H
C
H
Thank
you,
Mr
chairman
co-chairman
and
select
blockchain
committee
members
for
inviting
me
to
participate.
I
also
wanted
to
thank
lso
David
Hopkinson
for
our
dialogue
in
this
bill.
My
name
is
Christopher
Allen
and
I'm,
the
founder
of
blockchain
Commons,
a
blockchain
infrastructure
development
and
research
organization
over
the
last
getting
close
to
five
years,
I've
been
quite
proud
to
witness
Wyoming
through
the
initial
blockchain
task
force,
and
now
the
select
committee
to
become
a
leader
in
the
area
of
digital
asset
technology
and
regulation.
H
It
is
because
of
law
successfully
begun
at
these
meetings
that
I
have
established
my
organization,
blockchain
Commons,
to
be
domiciled
in
Cheyenne
Wyoming
and
have
encouraged
other
companies
to
do
the
same
in
regards
to
this
legislation.
I
believe
it
is
quite
important
and
and
a
decade
from
now
it
may
be
considered
like
the
LLC
to
be
one
of
the
most
pivotal
laws
in
the
emerging
digital
world.