Home › Legal Opinion Counsel › Crypto Treasury Opinions

Digital-Asset Treasury · Novel Securities · Board-Level Review

Crypto Treasury Legal Opinion for Companies and Boards

You are holding, or issuing above, a digital-asset treasury: preferred equity, convertible instruments, structured credit, a tokenized security, or the treasury program itself. The questions do not stop at "is it a security" - they run through exemption path, board authority, treasury policy, reserve and redemption mechanics, disclosure, custody, and the Investment Company Act perimeter. I write the analysis a board, lender, or counterparty can actually use, at a fixed fee stated before payment.

Request fixed-fee scope Read the Digital Credit hub first

Three products, priced by responsibility

$15,000

Treasury Legal Architecture Memorandum

Internal-use: treasury structure, securities characterization, financing map, governance, custody, reserve architecture, board policy, risk register, exemption path, specialist-issue map. A serious answer without third-party reliance.

Start intake

$25,000

Formal Written Opinion

One issuer, one instrument, one defined transaction, a named reliance universe: characterization, exemption, issuer and board authority, treasury policy, principal disclosure issues, custody perimeter, management factual certificate, reliance limitations, closing binder.

Start intake

$30,000–$45,000

Digital Credit Launch Package

The opinion plus the build: charter designation, board package, offering and subscription documents, dividend and reset policy, reserve policy, redemption mechanics, custody integration, first closing, specialist coordination. Multi-instrument stacks $50,000–$75,000; institutional programs quoted from $75,000.

Start intake

Questions these engagements answer

When this fits - and when it does not

A good fit: an operating company adopting a material digital-asset treasury; an issuer designing preferred, convertible, or structured instruments above it; a tokenized-security program; a board or lender that needs a written position it can rely on.
Not a fit: "make my token not a security"; investor-facing promotion of any offering; registered public offerings without capital-markets lead counsel alongside; questions that are dispositively tax, banking, or non-U.S. law - those get specialists, coordinated, not improvised.
The factual record comes first. Every conclusion rests on a certified record: the entity, the instrument terms, the proceeds and custody flow, the investor population, and the reliance audience. I will tell you exactly what the record needs before the fee is final - and the fee is a flat responsibility tier, never a percentage of the raise.

Context for the whole practice area - the instrument stack, the dividend mechanics, what builders miss - lives on the Digital Credit & Bitcoin Treasury hub. Fund-side structures are at fund counsel; the opinion practice generally at legal opinion counsel.

Attorney advertising. Sergei Tokmakov, California Bar #279869, admitted in California and Washington. Informational only; not legal, investment, or tax advice; no attorney-client relationship until conflict clearance and a written engagement. I analyze legal questions for issuers, boards, and counsel; I do not market securities to investors, and nothing here is an offer of securities or a promise of any regulatory outcome.