Propose a change

Proceeds of Crime Act 2002

Write the words of this act the way you think they should read. Solon shows your change as a redline against the published text and pins it to that exact text, so it can never be applied to wording you did not see.

Change 1

What to do with it
As published

303Z26 Seizure of cryptoasset-related items

(1) An enforcement officer may seize any item of property if the enforcement officer has reasonable grounds for suspecting that the item is a cryptoasset-related item. (2) If an enforcement officer is lawfully on any premises, the officer may, for the purpose of— (a) determining whether any property is a cryptoasset-related item, or (b) enabling or facilitating the seizure under this Chapter of any cryptoasset, require any information which is stored in any electronic form and accessible from the premises to be produced in a form in which it can be taken away and in which it is visible and legible, or from which it can readily be produced in a visible and legible form. (3) But subsection (2) does not authorise an enforcement officer to require a person to produce privileged information. (4) In this section “privileged information” means information which a person would be entitled to refuse to provide— (a) in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, on grounds of legal professional privilege in proceedings in the High Court; (b) in Scotland, on grounds of legal privilege as defined by section 412. (5) Where an enforcement officer has seized a cryptoasset-related item under subsection (1), the officer may use any information obtained from the item for the purpose of— (a) identifying or gaining access to a crypto wallet, and (b) by doing so, enabling or facilitating the seizure under this Chapter of any cryptoassets. (6) This section does not authorise the seizure by an SFO officer or an accredited financial investigator of an item found in Scotland.

Your change, as a redline

303Z26 Seizure of cryptoasset-related items

(1) An enforcement officer may seize any item of property if the enforcement officer has reasonable grounds for suspecting that the item is a cryptoasset-related item. (2) If an enforcement officer is lawfully on any premises, the officer may, for the purpose of— (a) determining whether any property is a cryptoasset-related item, or (b) enabling or facilitating the seizure under this Chapter of any cryptoasset, require any information which is stored in any electronic form and accessible from the premises to be produced in a form in which it can be taken away and in which it is visible and legible, or from which it can readily be produced in a visible and legible form. (3) But subsection (2) does not authorise an enforcement officer to require a person to produce privileged information. (4) In this section “privileged information” means information which a person would be entitled to refuse to provide— (a) in England and Wales and Northern Ireland, on grounds of legal professional privilege in proceedings in the High Court; (b) in Scotland, on grounds of legal privilege as defined by section 412. (5) Where an enforcement officer has seized a cryptoasset-related item under subsection (1), the officer may use any information obtained from the item for the purpose of— (a) identifying or gaining access to a crypto wallet, and (b) by doing so, enabling or facilitating the seizure under this Chapter of any cryptoassets. (6) This section does not authorise the seizure by an SFO officer or an accredited financial investigator of an item found in Scotland.

One line that says what changes, such as "Halve the dog tax".

Who it helps, what it costs, what it fixes. It is what persuades people to support it.

A proposal here is not law. Support on Solon is evidence that people want the change; the official route says what it takes to make it law.

Sign in to file your proposal. What you have written stays on this page.

Sign in to file it

Think it through

Ask what your change would do, who would gain and who would bear a cost, and where something like it is already law. The assistant reads your draft as it stands, cites the law and the studies it finds, and takes no side. What you file stays yours.

Questions to start with
Think it through
Legal information from the published text, not advice for your case. Check the sources. Find a law · What the register holds