The SEC this week proposed a new rule package for crypto assets, offering two registration exemptions and a conditional safe harbor that could let tokens break free from the investment contracts they were sold under. The proposal, called Regulation Crypto Assets, is the agency's latest attempt to fit digital assets into federal securities law.
Translation:
"SEC foreslog i denne uge en ny regelpakke for kryptoaktiver, der tilbyder to registreringsfritagelser og en betinget sikker havn, som kunne give tokens mulighed for at bryde fri fra de investeringskontrakter, de blev solgt under. Forslaget, kaldet Regulation Crypto Assets, er agenturets seneste forsøg på at passe digitale aktiver ind i den føderale værdipapirlovgivning."
Note: "crypto assets" -> "kryptoaktiver" (or "kryptovalutaer"? but "assets" is "aktiver"). "tokens" -> "tokens" (common in Danish). "investment contracts" -> "investeringskontrakter". "break free" -> "bryde fri" or "slippe af med". I used "brygge" but that's wrong, it's "bryde" (to break). So "bryde fri fra" - correct. "agency's latest attempt" -> "agenturets seneste forsøg". "fit" -> "passe" or "tilpasse". "federal securities law" -> "føderal værdipapirlovgivning". Also, "this week" -> "i denne uge".
So first paragraph:
" SEC foreslog i denne uge en ny regelpakke for kryptaktiver, der tilbyder to registreringsfritagelser og en betinget sikker havn, som kunne give tokens mulighed for at bryde fri fra de investeringskontrakter, de blev solgt under. Forslaget, kaldet Regulation Crypto Assets, er agenturets seneste forsøg på at tilpasse digitale aktiver til føderal værdipapirlovgivning."
I used "sikker havn" for safe harbor. Also "Regulation Crypto Assets" is the name of the proposal, so we keep it in English.
Next: What the exemptions allow
-> "Hvad fritagelserne tillader" or "Hvad undtagelserne tillader" but we used "fritagelser" for exemptions. So "Hvad fritagelserne tillader".
Then:
"The first exemption is aimed at startups. It would allow offerings of up to $5 million over a four-year period. The second is broader, permitting up to $75 million in each 12-month period. Both would require issuers to provide principles-based narrative disclosures — essentially, a description of the project and its risks, rather than a full registration statement. That's a lighter touch than a traditional IPO, but it's not a free pass."
Translate:
"Den første fritagelse er rettet mod startups. Den ville tillade udbud på op til 5 mio. dollars over en fireårig periode. Den anden er bredere, og tillader op til 75 mio. dollars i hver 12-måneders periode. Begge ville kræve, at udstedere giver princippbaserede narrative oplysninger — i det væsentlige en beskrivelse af projektet og dets risici, snarere end en fuld registreringserklæring. Det er en lettere tilgang end en traditionel IPO, men det er ikke en gratis omgang."
I used "udstedere" for issuers. "princippbaserede" - maybe "principbaserede" is better. "narrative disclosures" -> "narrative oplysninger" or "fortællende oplysninger"? Usually "narrative" is kept as "narrative" or "beskrivende". I'll use "beskrivende oplysninger" but "narrative" is also used. I'll say "princippbaserede beskrivende oplysninger". Also "lighter touch" -> "en lettere tilgang". "free pass" -> "gratis adgang" or "fribillet". I'll say "det er ikke en gratis omgang" but "free pass" is like "fribillet" - but let's say "det er ikke en fri adgang" or "det er ikke en gratis billet". I'll use "det er ikke en gratis omgang" - but "omgang" is a bit informal. Perhaps "det er ikke en gratis adgang" or "det er ikke en fri adgang". I'll go with "det er ikke en gratis adgang".
But we need to ensure proper Danish: "Both would require issuers to provide principles-based narrative disclosures" -> "Begge ville kræve, at udstedere giver princippbaserede narrative oplysninger" - "narrative" might be kept as "narrative" in Danish, but it's okay. Alternatively "fortællende" but that's not common. I'll use "narrative" as is.
Now the safe harbor section
