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

67AA Destruction of seized cryptoassets

(1) This section applies to cryptoassets which are held by a person and which have been seized by an appropriate officer under a relevant seizure power. (2) A magistrates’ court may by order authorise an appropriate officer to destroy the cryptoassets if— (a) a confiscation order is made against the person by whom the cryptoassets are held, (b) a receiver has not been appointed under section 50 in relation to the cryptoassets, and (c) either— (i) it is not reasonably practicable to realise the cryptoassets, or (ii) there are reasonable grounds to believe that the realisation of the cryptoassets would be contrary to the public interest, having regard in particular to how likely it is that the entry of the cryptoassets into general circulation would facilitate criminal conduct by any person. (3) An order under this section— (a) must set out the court’s assessment of the market value of the cryptoassets to which it relates; (b) may authorise the destruction of cryptoassets only to the extent that their market value, as set out in the order, is less than or equal to the amount remaining to be paid under the confiscation order. (4) Before making an order under this section, the court must give persons who hold interests in the cryptoassets a reasonable opportunity to make representations to it. (5) If cryptoassets held by a person are destroyed following an order under this section, the person is to be treated as having paid, towards satisfaction of the confiscation order, an amount equal to the market value, as set out in the order, of the cryptoassets which have been destroyed. (6) In this section “appropriate officer” and “relevant seizure power” have the same meaning as in section 41A.

Your change, as a redline

67AA Destruction of seized cryptoassets

(1) This section applies to cryptoassets which are held by a person and which have been seized by an appropriate officer under a relevant seizure power. (2) A magistrates’ court may by order authorise an appropriate officer to destroy the cryptoassets if— (a) a confiscation order is made against the person by whom the cryptoassets are held, (b) a receiver has not been appointed under section 50 in relation to the cryptoassets, and (c) either— (i) it is not reasonably practicable to realise the cryptoassets, or (ii) there are reasonable grounds to believe that the realisation of the cryptoassets would be contrary to the public interest, having regard in particular to how likely it is that the entry of the cryptoassets into general circulation would facilitate criminal conduct by any person. (3) An order under this section— (a) must set out the court’s assessment of the market value of the cryptoassets to which it relates; (b) may authorise the destruction of cryptoassets only to the extent that their market value, as set out in the order, is less than or equal to the amount remaining to be paid under the confiscation order. (4) Before making an order under this section, the court must give persons who hold interests in the cryptoassets a reasonable opportunity to make representations to it. (5) If cryptoassets held by a person are destroyed following an order under this section, the person is to be treated as having paid, towards satisfaction of the confiscation order, an amount equal to the market value, as set out in the order, of the cryptoassets which have been destroyed. (6) In this section “appropriate officer” and “relevant seizure power” have the same meaning as in section 41A.

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