#加州通过法案拟禁官员发行meme币
👉 官员发Meme币要被禁？进群看监管风向
California passes a bill that would ban government officials from issuing Meme coins, marking the first time regulators have clearly aimed their sights at celebrity-issued tokens.
Multiple cases in the past—where celebrity tokens collapsed soon after listing and retail investors ended up buying at the highs—have driven regulators’ stance to change sharply. If the bill becomes law, officials and related entities would be unable to leverage their status to issue tokens. Violators would face clear penalties, pulling the token-issuing threshold back from “anyone can play” to “rules apply.”
At its core, it’s a crackdown on the monetization of “influence.” For a long time, the conversion between attention and tokens has lacked oversight, and the information gap ultimately leaves latecomer retail investors to foot the bill. Regulation is not about killing innovation—it’s about filling gaps in trust within the market, so that prices are determined by value rather than fame.
When a name itself can be priced, the very purpose of price-setting in the market is lost. What do you think?
👉 官员发Meme币要被禁？进群看监管风向
California passes a bill that would ban government officials from issuing Meme coins, marking the first time regulators have clearly aimed their sights at celebrity-issued tokens.
Multiple cases in the past—where celebrity tokens collapsed soon after listing and retail investors ended up buying at the highs—have driven regulators’ stance to change sharply. If the bill becomes law, officials and related entities would be unable to leverage their status to issue tokens. Violators would face clear penalties, pulling the token-issuing threshold back from “anyone can play” to “rules apply.”
At its core, it’s a crackdown on the monetization of “influence.” For a long time, the conversion between attention and tokens has lacked oversight, and the information gap ultimately leaves latecomer retail investors to foot the bill. Regulation is not about killing innovation—it’s about filling gaps in trust within the market, so that prices are determined by value rather than fame.
When a name itself can be priced, the very purpose of price-setting in the market is lost. What do you think?
