Dear Securities and Exchange Commission, I am writing to express my concerns regarding the proposed rule "Safeguarding Advisory Client Assets." While I appreciate the SEC's efforts to enhance investor protections, there are certain areas of the rule that require further consideration. Specifically, the inadequate consideration of the unique properties of cryptocurrency and the need for clarification on the treatment of digital assets. Firstly, I would like to address the issue of inadequate consideration of cryptocurrency. The SEC's proposed rule fails to fully acknowledge the decentralized nature and technological complexities of cryptocurrency. This oversight leads to impractical regulatory requirements. Crypto assets operate on blockchain technology, which provides transparent and secure transactions without the need for traditional intermediaries. However, the proposed rule imposes stringent custody and safeguarding requirements that are ill-suited to the nature of these digital assets. Cryptocurrency does not fit neatly into existing categories such as currency, security, or commodity. It possesses unique characteristics that warrant a tailored regulatory approach. Consequently, the proposed rule should incorporate provisions that consider the peculiarities of this emerging asset class. Any regulatory framework should strike a balance between safeguarding investor assets and enabling innovation in the expanding cryptocurrency market. Furthermore, I would like to request clarification regarding the treatment of digital assets that do not fit into traditional categories. It is essential to provide clear guidance on how such assets will be treated for reporting purposes. As the market evolves, innovative assets that do not neatly fit into existing definitions will continue to emerge. The rule should account for these evolving assets to ensure fair treatment and effective oversight. It is also crucial to ensure that any reporting requirements do not stifle innovation or create unnecessary burdens for market participants. The SEC should consider incorporating flexibility into its reporting framework to accommodate the unique aspects of digital assets in a manner that maintains investor protections. In conclusion, I urge the SEC to reconsider the proposed rule "Safeguarding Advisory Client Assets" by taking into account the unique properties of cryptocurrency and providing clearer guidance on the treatment of digital assets. It is essential that any regulation in this space strikes the right balance between investor protection and fostering innovation. Thank you for considering my concerns. I trust that the SEC will take the necessary steps to address these issues in the final rule. Sincerely, Glen Osinski