Dan Taylor

969 posts

Dan Taylor banner
Dan Taylor

Dan Taylor

@ProfAnalytics

Professor @Wharton; Forensic Analytics; expertise in financial data analysis, SEC filings, accounting fraud, and insider trading.

Katılım Ocak 2020
224 Takip Edilen3.9K Takipçiler
Dan Taylor retweetledi
The Wharton School
The Wharton School@Wharton·
Research co-authored by Prof. Daniel Taylor (@ProfAnalytics) helped influence the United States Congress to recently pass the Holding Foreign Insiders Accountable Act (HFIA): whr.tn/3SW3kjR When corporate insiders at U.S. companies sell their own stock, they are required to report it publicly within two business days. This was not the case for insiders at foreign companies listed on U.S. exchanges until Prof. Taylor – faculty lead of @WhartonAIAI's Forensic Analytics Lab – and his co-authors Robert J. Jackson, Jr. and Bradford Levy (@blynch41) provided the first systematic look at what that exemption was actually enabling.
The Wharton School tweet media
English
0
3
10
2.5K
Dan Taylor retweetledi
Merriam-Webster
Merriam-Webster@MerriamWebster·
Why is it ‘cancelled’ in the U.K. but ‘canceled’ in the U.S.? Because we gave them that L in 1776.
English
3K
39.2K
271.9K
16.9M
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
The decision means these agencies will flip-flop from extreme right wing regulatory positions to extreme left-wing regulatory positions, and industry will end up bearing added cost. Whatever your politics, whether you lean right or you lean left, you should detest regulatory volatility.
English
0
0
4
200
Tyler Gellasch
Tyler Gellasch@TylerGellasch·
In a post-Slaughter regulatory world, I am not sure an "independent" structure adds value. People should start thinking hard about CFPB, Fed, FDIC, and OCC becoming the "Banking Division" and SEC and CFTC becoming the "Capital Markets Division" of the Treasury Department.
English
2
5
23
3.2K
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
@MickBransfield It could enforce against the exchanges for taking US customer. Or the US users themselves. eg Intrade style.
English
1
0
0
31
Mick Bransfield
Mick Bransfield@MickBransfield·
@ProfAnalytics If the US government wanted to shut down any blockchain base prediction market today, it could. But decentralization technology is evolving very quickly & that probably won't be true in a 5-10 years. It would need to shut down Ethereum, and I'm skeptical of the possibility.
English
1
0
2
248
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
Is the CFTC up to the task? (1) If one of these exchanges fails FTX-style, it will put a black eye on the entire industry. We need a strong CFTC. (2) We need enforcement by DOJ against unregulated exchanges that willfully accept US customers.
Mick Bransfield@MickBransfield

Over 1,000 prediction markets have been founded. The numbers show us: • Tough space — only 439 still operating • Crypto dominates — 68% of all markets • Young — 78% built since 2020

English
1
1
3
856
Dan Taylor retweetledi
robertjdenault
robertjdenault@robertjdenault·
Today, we announced that Kalshi will now require employment information in order to trade in certain markets. Market integrity is a more than just a lofty goal for us. It’s the reason we collect identification info from every trader, why we surveil our markets 24/7, and why we continue to expand our capabilities to prevent, detect, and punish misconduct. The work is never done, but we are proud to mark yet another big step today in leading the prediction market industry on the issue of integrity. news.kalshi.com/p/kalshi-marke…
English
6
15
72
10.4K
Tyler Gellasch
Tyler Gellasch@TylerGellasch·
@ChairmanSelig Alternatively, do we want these markets to make "predictions"? The best predictions are made by insiders. Yet, the CFTC is required to police insider trading. So, sadly, the utility as a predictive tool relies upon breaking the law. Let's pick a function and regulate to it. 2/2
English
1
0
2
180
Mike Selig
Mike Selig@ChairmanSelig·
It is no coincidence that major media outlets, exchanges, and financial institutions are increasingly turning to prediction markets. When people have real skin in the game, the data follows, and that is the wisdom of the crowds at work. Watch now⬇️
English
12
16
124
14.4K
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
As an expert in market integrity: This is correct. I would point out that @CFTC claims domain over all these markets. In order to win back the public trust, I urge @MichaelSelig to put together a blue ribbon panel that issues a report to the public.
John Arnold@johnarnold

Between stock trading by federal officials, insider trading in prediction markets, fixed sporting events, and suspicious moves in energy, integrity in markets feels lower today than at any point in the modern era.

English
1
1
4
611
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
Agree 50/50. Defn should ban no KYC/permissionless. Tokenization needs to be issuer sponsored. But even then, token trading does not have same KYC as US broker/dealers. Unless issuer compliance department has all employee wallet addresses, unclear how they can track an officer’s trades in the tokenized security for reporting on Form 4.
English
1
0
0
74
Robert Leshner
Robert Leshner@rleshner·
@ProfAnalytics Dan, there are many types of tokenization; you’re right for “no KYC, permissionless” versions of tokenization / synthetic, but incorrect for issuer-sponsored tokenization
English
3
1
10
2.9K
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
Tokenized securities exponentially increase insider trading risks for public companies b/c compliance officers will be unable to track employees’ trading of the tokenized security on the blockchain. e.g., Want to evade the blackout window? Just buy the tokenized security. Do purchases and sales of tokenized securities by Section 16 insiders trigger required disclosures? Would the GC even know? How?
Bloomberg@business

Under the Securities and Exchange Commission's proposal, platforms offering tokens would need to guarantee investors receive the same rights as regular shareholders bloomberg.com/news/articles/…

English
7
2
21
9.8K
Dan Taylor retweetledi
Peter Mallouk
Peter Mallouk@PeterMallouk·
House Speaker Johnson argues that $200K isn’t enough for members of Congress to support their families, so they should either get a raise or be allowed to trade individual stocks. Otherwise, he says, America won’t attract qualified people to serve. Whether Republican or Democrat, I think we can agree they’re in office to SERVE, it is called being a public SERVANT, and we don’t need them doing it for decades. One or two terms, max. After that, they get so captured by special interests they’ll do whatever it takes to stay in office. No thanks. As for stock trading, the evidence is overwhelming that people picking individual stocks underperform the market. The only way a member of Congress beats it is with inside information, which both parties have shown, repeatedly, they’re willing to use and make unearned, unethical profits on the backs of the American taxpayer. There should be no raises and no stock trading allowed for anyone in Congress
Wu Tang is for the Children@WUTangKids

Absolute insanity….here is Mike Johnson saying members of Congress need to be able to continue their insider trading because the yearly salary of $174K with healthcare and taxpayer funded vacations every other week is not enough for them

English
107
135
870
122.2K
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
The position that Congressional trading should be permitted b/c the pay is so low is an abomination. That the Speaker of the House (R) would advocate for it, reveals how tone deaf he is. It is a LOSER politically.
Wu Tang is for the Children@WUTangKids

Absolute insanity….here is Mike Johnson saying members of Congress need to be able to continue their insider trading because the yearly salary of $174K with healthcare and taxpayer funded vacations every other week is not enough for them

English
0
2
7
593
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
John — You might be interested in the work we are doing at the Wharton Forensic Analytics Lab to detect and deter insider trading and white-collar crime. We were able to work with bipartisan groups to pass 2 SEC rules, and 1 Act of Congress. Would love to chat. ai-analytics.wharton.upenn.edu/wharton-forens…
English
0
0
7
187
Dan Taylor retweetledi
John Arnold
John Arnold@johnarnold·
It would take the CFTC about 5 minutes to figure out who this was and whether there was any misconduct, assuming they want to.
John Arnold tweet media
English
65
353
2.5K
249.2K
Dan Taylor
Dan Taylor@ProfAnalytics·
@CodfishJohnny CFTC has Eddie Murphy Rule, the SEC does not. Makes it illegal to trade commodities or futures using misappropriated non-public government information. Sec 746 Dodd Frank.
English
1
0
2
1.7K
Codfish Johnny
Codfish Johnny@CodfishJohnny·
Some people assume the Trump Oil Futures is a case of insider trading. After Blaszczak II, my starting point is that it likely isn’t. Government information isn’t sufficiently “property” to be the subject of a fraud. And insider trading is just fraud under 10(b).
The Writings of BGF@WritingsOfBGF

@CodfishJohnny They get busted by insider trading but White House doesnt

English
1
0
3
1.1K

Keşfet

@WhartonAIAI @blynch41 @MickBransfield @TylerGellasch @ChairmanSelig @CFTC @MichaelSelig @elonmusk