this would go against all progression we’ve made in the industry and stifle innovation further. This is not what we need to succeed in the crypto space.

May 5, 2025

Ms. Jennifer Piorko Mitchell Office of the Corporate Secretary FINRA

1735 K Street

Washington, DC 20006

Re: Request for Comment on Regulatory Notice25-05

Dear Ms. Mitchell,

I am an owner of a Registered Investment Advisory firm and a registered representative of an unaffiliated FINRA member firm. I appreciate the opportunity to comment on the newly proposed Rule 3290 as set forth in FINRA Regulatory Notice 25-05.

To Whom It May Concern,

Jennifer Piorko Mitchell, Office of the Corporate Secretary, FINRA, 1700 K Street, NW, Washington, DC 20006

I would like to voice my strong opposition to FINRA Regulatory Notice 25-05 and Proposed Rule 3290.

It will bring US regulatory body back to the dark ages in terms of cryptocurrency markets. Please do not implement it.

Gregory Romanczuk

Chicago, IL

I do not support FINRA Regulatory Notice 25-05 and Proposed Rule 3290. Prohibiting a financial advisor who holds a FINRA license from personally investing in any crypto asset without first getting written approval from their broker/dealer as well as applying this rule to the advisor’s spouse, partner, children and anyone else living in the household is ridiculous and backwards thinking.

I'm not sure how this proposed rule came to be, but please stop this before implementation.

Absolutely the worst rule proposal I could imagine hearing. Please vote no on this.

This rule would certainly cause a major disruption to advisor's and their clients, especially,

to smaller clients who may not qualify for RIA status.

I see no reason why a financial advisor should need permission from a broker/dealer before owning crypto assets. This has nothing to do with their duties as advisors.

Separately, allow me to say wow. How much time and energy did staffers at FINRA spend on the excessive verbiage that went into this notice and all the deliberations over proposing such a silly and unnecessary rule? You guys need to be DOGE'd.

I oppose FINRA Regulatory Notice 25-05 and Proposed Rule 3290

I just don't see the benefit of this rule change requirement. Especially after the fact. If it were a requirement originally OK, but not afterwards. Maybe make it a requirement for new RIA's or post date it to a future date requirement. If FINRA interferes with Crypto investments at this stage it will just hurt all investors. FA's wiil just go to the alternative route, therefore eliminating the FINRA rule change, or FiNRA itself alltogether. We need pro active Crypto investment support at this point not hindered by a stupid unnecessary rule change.