The development of modern economies critically depends on the existence and smooth functioning of credit markets. Access to credit and funding sources in reasonable conditions determine survival possibilities of projects, initiatives, and businesses and delimit their growth opportunities. Recent periods of crisis and economic turmoil have appreciably debilitated financing muscle in our economies. Accordingly, credit facilities have been dramatically limited. In such a context, the search for alternative financing sources has become a priority for social, business, research, or cultural projects. Crowdfunding emerges as an encouraging alternative to traditional funding sources able to promote, boost, and support a variety of projects. Crowdfunding is not a new phenomenon, but due to the conjunction of the economic climate, technological progress, and social trends, it has gained momentum in present times with a unique profile. It cannot be entirely explained as a mere emulation of existing financing models. As crowdfunding has spread (mainly, in America and Europe), and the number of funded projects, financing platforms and prospective contributors has rocketed, close attention has been paid by legislators, supervisors and regulators. The increasing volume and scope of the phenomenon has increased legal concerns. Not surprisingly, initiatives to regulate and/or supervise activity and participants in the crowdfunding sector have been undertaken in jurisdictions with the most active crowdfunding markets.

Whereas in 2012 the United States adopted the Crowdfunding Act, Title III “Capital Raising Online While Deterring Fraud and Unethical Non-Disclosure Act of 2012” of Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act (JOBS Act), the European Union is still working on a regulatory model for crowdfunding in Europe. Some EU Member States have already enacted or are in process of adopting rules on crowdfunding. Nevertheless, full harmonization on crowdfunding rules is still in progress. Within such a context, the aim of this Paper is two-fold. First, to outline crowdfunding from a legal perspective, to identify operating business models and legal variants, and, finally, to sketch the contours of possible regulations. Second, to provide a framework for the comparative analysis of rules on crowdfunding in the European Union and the United States, to identify similarities and differences, and to develop qualitative conclusions. A comparative approach to U.S./EU regulatory processes may reveal differing views both in legal solutions and in procedural decisions. Such a comparative analysis might provide some helpful insights to the process in the EU.