Dave Kaplan

Crypto Lawyer | GC at | founder of DK Law ( | formerly at Horizons Law | FT in crypto since 2018

*Content not legal advice

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

The first of these loans are apparently already closing. An interesting option for using bitcoin without having to sell it.

https://t.co/zbJkLdXLT8

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

Last week there was a lot of talk about the news that crypto can be used for home mortgages. Here's the facts and how this would actually work:

- This is a deal between @coinbase and one private mortgage provider, Better Home & Finance, so to take advantage you have to use this lender.

- This initiative is directed at the down payment typically required for a mortgage, and not the monthly payments themselves.

- The theory is that typically, a person has to sell assets (stocks, crypto, anything else) to obtain the funds they need for their down payment, which is often 20% of a home price. The program attempts to solve this problem.

- Instead of selling assets, a person can pledge crypto to the lender without selling it. It would run through Coinbase Custody, and they would hold it. They say that the homebuyer would not have its assets liquidated or lost unless it falls behind on payments.

-Because the lender doesn't actually receive the homebuyer's crypto assets, the monthly payments are adjusted accordingly to make up the difference.

- In this way, the homebuyer essentially has a double loan. It loans its crypto to the lender (but receives it back if it makes all payments), and the lender then loans the homebuyer using a traditional loan with monthly payments.

- They say that these loans are approved to be compliant with Fannie Mae, which means that the loans would be considered to be "conforming" and therefore have the possibility to receive the lower tier of mortgage rates.

https://t.co/CiJS0IR1TP

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

In the latest insider trading enforcement on prediction markets, last week, the CFTC and the US atty filed a complaint against a Google employee for taking confidential information he learned at Google and using it to "predict" who the most search person on Google in 2025 would be and other similar searches, earning $1.2 million in profits on Polymarket.

The employee is now facing criminal and civil charges.

Insider trading with confidential corporate information is illegal, similar to taking such information and using it to trade stocks.

https://t.co/9OeuFLidt1

The CFTC stated:

"“Employees who are entrusted with confidential business information cannot misappropriate that information for personal financial gain,” said Director of Enforcement David I. Miller."

"As a Google employee, Spagnuolo owed a duty of trust and confidence to Google to maintain the confidentiality of that information and not use it for personal gain. In violation of those duties, from at least October 2025 through at least December 2025, Spagnuolo purchased “Yes” or “No” shares on at least twenty-three of the 2025 Year in Search List contracts on https://t.co/z4Tbvxqb5k, including “#1 Searched Person on Google this year” and “Top 5 Most Searched People on Google 2025,” with near-perfect accuracy."

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

@BudElliott3 Doesn't even matter that nobody gets elected or ejected based on an issue. The rest of your post applies to pretty much every government issue. No incentive to solve. Incentive to make sure there is a continued perceived crisis for to keep people's attention and to extract $.

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

Perfect example of why you wouldn't want to depend on AI or inexperienced attorneys to do agreements between co-founders or other early personnel. These critical documents can be taken out of a box, but you get what you pay for, and could cause a huge project-threatening problem later.

[Laura Shin @laurashin]

"There were actually five co-founders of Pudgy Penguins. The fifth one tried to sell equity behind my back to a group of dumpers"

Luca on the story he's never told and the operating agreement lesson every founder needs to hear

"He was selling to a really predatory group known for being anti-founder, just dumpers. When I found out, I went pretty ballistic"

"The flaw was in my operating agreement. It allowed the transaction to occur. Today if somebody tries to sell Igloo shares without my explicit approval, you cannot sell. Period"

"People have come to me for 100K, 200K liquidity over the years. I nixed it every time. You're either here for the ride or you're not. You get liquidity when everybody else gets liquidity"

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

@milesjennings Thought it was common understanding that in addition to Clarity, we also need to update the tax code regarding crypto

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

CLARITY has advanced out of the Senate Banking Committee on a 15-9 vote. Two Democrats joined 13 Republicans in voting to advance the bill.

It now moves to the full U.S. Senate.

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

Clarity Act draft finally released!

[Eleanor Terrett @EleanorTerrett]

🚨JUST IN: The Senate Banking Committee has released the new 309-page draft of the Clarity Act it’s been working on since January.

Committee members now have until close of business tomorrow to file amendments ahead of Thursday’s markup.

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

Clarity Act currently has a 74% chance of being signed into law in 2026 according to Polymarket

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

Finally, Clarity is officially moving forward

[Eleanor Terrett @EleanorTerrett]

🚨NEW: @BankingGOP Committee markup of the Clarity Act set for Thursday, May 14 at 10:30 AM EST.

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

AAVE Update: Looks like AAVE LLC, who filed the motion papers earlier this week, has reached an agreement with the Kim et al. plaintiffs to hold the funds itself until the Court can determine where they should go.

Why this matters:

1. Removes standing issue for AAVE LLC to participate in the case;

2. Court gets to not rule on the emergency motion and consider the matter on regular timing.

https://t.co/6iwqbBwXRd

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

Lost in the @coinbase news cycle is that they have done layoffs four times (publicly) since 2022. AI is the reason this time, but they gave a PR reason each time.

The trend is obvious, when there's an upcycle, Coinbase hires a lot; when there's a downcycle the do layoffs. Not complicated.

Not good management. This really just means they didn't plan correctly.

Every time a company uses "AI" as a reason for layoffs, question it. AI should in general make their team more productive and powerful (and thus, more able to bring in more revenue).

[moritz @onchainmo]

Coinbase has to be one of the most mismanaged companies in crypto.

> was considered a blue-chip just a few years ago
> launches an NFT marketplace with just a few thousand dollars of daily volume
> people complaining about frozen funds for years
> platform sometimes goes down for hours
> acquires Echo for $375 million (an ICO platform with $200 million total volume)
> fires 700 employees a few months later
> CEO selling $550 million worth of his Coinbase shares
> net loss of $400 million last quarter
> $COIN is down 56% while every other tech stock keeps hitting new all-time highs

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

@JacobRobinsonJD @LawofCodeFM @valkenburgh @amandatums @brianeklein Great work on this one. Could really tell how much time and effort went into this and it showed in the product.

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

I may be in the minority but I do not hope to see a change in the race schedule to make it easier to win a Triple Crown. It's okay to have an achievement that rarely happens.

There is no need to water this one down.

The real issue here is likely that the owners of the KD winner believe this is not the best horse for the TC and are therefore more concerned about stud $ than winning races. If they made the prize for winning a successive TC race $20 million, you wouldn't see horses skipping.

[Chuck Todd @chucktodd]

Sigh… Please, Triple Crown people, create a schedule that encourages participation in all three races. This stubbornness about the dates of these races is self-defeating. Most major sporting events have allowed their schedules to change to accommodate changes in the sport.

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

There's definitely non-financial value in youth sports. Just getting into fitness habits alone is something that will benefit many for the rest of their lives.

But as far as a pure financial calculation, the odds of getting a scholarship or NIL money or a professional contract are astronomically low.

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

Well this is a nice partial walk-back (although declining to acknowledge that the entire thrust of the piece was incorrect). It still doesn't answer what exactly is suspicious? What is legally required for an HQ?

As an example, the article states that the company's lawyers' refusal to respond to inquiries is somehow nefarious. I don't know too many attorneys who will discuss their clients with the media without permission unless they're trying to get disbarred.

The article also uses the lack of awareness of nearby people on the street as if it's some barometer of legality. Laughable.

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

@asglidden @lex_node Thats going to take some serious investigative reporting.

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

@KeyserSozeThree @BobbyAllyn @JETarhan This is not how taxes work either.

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

This got published somehow.

They seriously don't know what it means to be incorporated somewhere?

Let me help you @BobbyAllyn. Being incorporated somewhere and not having a presence there is not a scandal.

[Bobby Allyn @BobbyAllyn]

We looked into Polymarket's presence in Panama, obtained its government paperwork and visited its headquarters in Panama City.

There was no sign of Polymarket. Nobody had heard of Polymarket there.

After more digging, we found that more than a dozen other crypto companies were not just incorporated there but also claim the address as their HQ.

Turns out, SBF even did business with the the office listed as Polymarket's HQ, which is a law firm that ignored all of our requests for comment.

https://t.co/FZSeRa8orS

[Dave Kaplan @CryptoLawDave]

@safetyth1rd @lex_node Which solution here would just mean that DPRK has the funds with no hope of their return. Why is that better than the current status?