More Regulation Incoming!

[ruftech705]

https://linktr.ee/rufmichael7053

[zasad@]

https://blockchain.news/news/coinme-fined-4-million-by-sec
"The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has fined Coinme, a cryptocurrency exchange, nearly $4 million for allegedly offering unregistered securities and making "misleading statements" about its crypto token, UpToken. Coinme, its subsidiary Up Global SEZC, and its CEO, Neil Bergquist, were charged by the SEC on April 28, with Up Global agreeing to pay a $3.52 million penalty, for which Coinme was also held liable. The SEC alleged that Coinme's Initial Coin Offering (ICO) of UpToken between October and December 2017 was an investment contract under the Howey test and was an unregistered securities offering. The ICO raised around $3.6 million to expand Coinme's fleet of Bitcoin ATMs, with the funds used to add 30 ATMs, and UP holders received benefits such as discounted fees and cashback when using the ATMs. However, in January 2019, Coinme changed its offering and partnered with Coinstar to use its cash-counting kiosks to facilitate cash-to-crypto transactions instead of its own ATMs. Coinme shut down all of its ATMs by July 2019, and there is currently no use for UpToken, with its market cap falling to around $50,000 and 24-hour trading volumes topping just over $180."
___
This exchange got off with a small fine.

[safar1980]

SEC Issues Largest-Ever Whistleblower Award

The Securities and Exchange Commission today announced the largest-ever award, nearly $279 million, to a whistleblower whose information and assistance led to the successful enforcement of SEC and related actions. This is the highest award in the SEC’s whistleblower program’s history, more than doubling the $114 million whistleblower award the SEC issued in October 2020.

[bbc.reporter]

I am not quite certain where to share this news article. This will become another attempt to disable the innovation being brought and enjoyed in the cryptospace.



A Democratic representative laid into witnesses during Wednesday’s joint hearing on crypto regulation, arguing that there is no way to effectively regulate crypto markets when they are subject to such “massive market manipulation.”

House Financial Services Committee member Bill Foster, D-Illi., argued that wash trading cannot be controlled without establishing federally-regulated “traceable digital identities” for all wallets and users.

“If we wish to prevent wash trading…is there any alternative to having both sides of every crypto transaction associated with a traceable digital identity and have that digital identity issued by a government with which we have extradition treaties and a common concept of financial fraud, is there any alternative to that?” Foster asked the panel of witnesses.

Source https://blockworks.co/news/self-custody-wallets-need-identities



In any case, I have argued against some people in the forum who tells everyone that regulations are good for adoption. However, it appears that they do not have any understanding on what regulations might imply on the cryptospace.

This is how I understand how regulations might be implemented and it will certainly not be good for adoption.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5447061.msg62196665#msg62196665

[zasad@]

I am not quite certain where to share this news article. This will become another attempt to disable the innovation being brought and enjoyed in the cryptospace.



A Democratic representative laid into witnesses during Wednesday’s joint hearing on crypto regulation, arguing that there is no way to effectively regulate crypto markets when they are subject to such “massive market manipulation.”

House Financial Services Committee member Bill Foster, D-Illi., argued that wash trading cannot be controlled without establishing federally-regulated “traceable digital identities” for all wallets and users.

“If we wish to prevent wash trading…is there any alternative to having both sides of every crypto transaction associated with a traceable digital identity and have that digital identity issued by a government with which we have extradition treaties and a common concept of financial fraud, is there any alternative to that?” Foster asked the panel of witnesses.

Source https://blockworks.co/news/self-custody-wallets-need-identities



In any case, I have argued against some people in the forum who tells everyone that regulations are good for adoption. However, it appears that they do not have any understanding on what regulations might imply on the cryptospace.

This is how I understand how regulations might be implemented and it will certainly not be good for adoption.

https://bitcointalk.org/index.php?topic=5447061.msg62196665#msg62196665

They still cannot determine which token or token is a commodity and which shares.
They learned how to track transactions on wallets and deal with scammers. Money does not like bans, and while they want to tighten regulation, there is hope for the emergence of new financial centers for cryptocurrencies in other countries.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. Centers for cryptocurrencies in other countries. This does not solve the problem of regulatory inclarity for the people who want to invest and use the cryptospace in America.

It also appears that it is not only the businesses that are focused on the cryptospace that want regulatory clarity. The US chamber of commerce has filed a brief questioning the SEC for acting unlawfully vs. Coinbase.



The SEC’s actions are not just harmful policy; they are unlawful; and the consequences of the SEC’s continued delay are severe for that reason too.

The SEC’s unwillingness to announce the rules of the road ex ante, combined with its use of enforcement actions to impose or threaten liability ex post, conflicts with the Due Process Clause and basic principles of administrative law. And the SEC’s continued inaction on Coinbase’s rulemaking petition compounds these violations.

Source https://www.uschamber.com/assets/documents/U.S.-Chamber-Amicus-Brief-In-re-Coinbase-Third-Circuit.pdf

[zasad@]

@zasad@. Centers for cryptocurrencies in other countries. This does not solve the problem of regulatory inclarity for the people who want to invest and use the cryptospace in America.

It also appears that it is not only the businesses that are focused on the cryptospace that want regulatory clarity. The US chamber of commerce has filed a brief questioning the SEC for acting unlawfully vs. Coinbase.



The SEC’s actions are not just harmful policy; they are unlawful; and the consequences of the SEC’s continued delay are severe for that reason too.

The SEC’s unwillingness to announce the rules of the road ex ante, combined with its use of enforcement actions to impose or threaten liability ex post, conflicts with the Due Process Clause and basic principles of administrative law. And the SEC’s continued inaction on Coinbase’s rulemaking petition compounds these violations.

Source https://www.uschamber.com/assets/documents/U.S.-Chamber-Amicus-Brief-In-re-Coinbase-Third-Circuit.pdf

Let me tell you my opinion, if I'm wrong, then you tell me where I'm wrong.
In the US, democracy, they do not have bribes, but there is lobbying. Binance in the US is declared a criminal and almost an accomplice of terrorists, so many officials are afraid to lobby for the interests of this company. The Coinbase exchange has a lobby, so they influence the SEC from different angles. This is how American democracy works.

[Woodie]

I don't like regulations, not only about privacy, but I fear that regulations will slow down the growth of the market.

Don't you think this regulation stance is 50/50, investors love to reduce their risk were possiblea and if regulation can minimise this risk I actually think the markets will actually grow.
Imagine trying to get a financing because of an illegal asset, this can never be approved and its a whitelisted one and this can happen with regulation.

I believe most people enter the market because they like the volatility of cryptocurrencies, but once there is regulation, I fear that will disappear along with our privacy. Look at the stock market or the forex market, they are regulated, and they become more stable because they are tightly managed.

But I think markets arent as volatileas they were back then were losing or gaining a thousand dollars on price was easy.

Regulations are inevitable, but we can only hope they won't be too strict with us.

Crypto will always have its way around regulation, and strictnessa should not worry anybody

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. Centers for cryptocurrencies in other countries. This does not solve the problem of regulatory inclarity for the people who want to invest and use the cryptospace in America.

It also appears that it is not only the businesses that are focused on the cryptospace that want regulatory clarity. The US chamber of commerce has filed a brief questioning the SEC for acting unlawfully vs. Coinbase.



The SEC’s actions are not just harmful policy; they are unlawful; and the consequences of the SEC’s continued delay are severe for that reason too.

The SEC’s unwillingness to announce the rules of the road ex ante, combined with its use of enforcement actions to impose or threaten liability ex post, conflicts with the Due Process Clause and basic principles of administrative law. And the SEC’s continued inaction on Coinbase’s rulemaking petition compounds these violations.

Source https://www.uschamber.com/assets/documents/U.S.-Chamber-Amicus-Brief-In-re-Coinbase-Third-Circuit.pdf

Let me tell you my opinion, if I'm wrong, then you tell me where I'm wrong.
In the US, democracy, they do not have bribes, but there is lobbying. Binance in the US is declared a criminal and almost an accomplice of terrorists, so many officials are afraid to lobby for the interests of this company. The Coinbase exchange has a lobby, so they influence the SEC from different angles. This is how American democracy works.

The argument is on regulatory clarity and how the SEC does not have a clear definition on what is an illegal security on much of the projects in the cryptospace. Also, you mention lobbying. Coinbase can lobby to influence the SEC, however, why is the SEC suing Coinbase based on accusations that cannot be backed because uncle Gary does not have the regulatory structure to bring these cases to completion?

[zasad@]

@zasad@. Centers for cryptocurrencies in other countries. This does not solve the problem of regulatory inclarity for the people who want to invest and use the cryptospace in America.

It also appears that it is not only the businesses that are focused on the cryptospace that want regulatory clarity. The US chamber of commerce has filed a brief questioning the SEC for acting unlawfully vs. Coinbase.



The SEC’s actions are not just harmful policy; they are unlawful; and the consequences of the SEC’s continued delay are severe for that reason too.

The SEC’s unwillingness to announce the rules of the road ex ante, combined with its use of enforcement actions to impose or threaten liability ex post, conflicts with the Due Process Clause and basic principles of administrative law. And the SEC’s continued inaction on Coinbase’s rulemaking petition compounds these violations.

Source https://www.uschamber.com/assets/documents/U.S.-Chamber-Amicus-Brief-In-re-Coinbase-Third-Circuit.pdf

Let me tell you my opinion, if I'm wrong, then you tell me where I'm wrong.
In the US, democracy, they do not have bribes, but there is lobbying. Binance in the US is declared a criminal and almost an accomplice of terrorists, so many officials are afraid to lobby for the interests of this company. The Coinbase exchange has a lobby, so they influence the SEC from different angles. This is how American democracy works.

The argument is on regulatory clarity and how the SEC does not have a clear definition on what is an illegal security on much of the projects in the cryptospace. Also, you mention lobbying. Coinbase can lobby to influence the SEC, however, why is the SEC suing Coinbase based on accusations that cannot be backed because uncle Gary does not have the regulatory structure to bring these cases to completion?

The SEC disagrees with your opinion.
They believe they are acting in accordance with US law.
Many projects preferred to negotiate with the regulator and pay fines.

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/coinbase-request-clarity-crypto-rules-112808455.html?
Coinbase Request for Clarity on Crypto Rules ‘Should Be Denied’, Says SEC

I have not read all the news today, and I will probably update the post. But I don't see any information that the SEC is suing. While I see a circus with a petition.
And while this is happening, secret negotiations are underway.

[bbc.reporter]

However, a judge disagrees with the SEC hehehe. There is also uncle Gary's case against Ripple Labs. Why has it not come to a conclusion if the SEC really can interpret and implement the rules and regulations in accordance to US law? It is very clear to anyone who follows cryptonews that uncle Gary and his team are having difficulties  because the rules are outdated and will kill the innovation being brought by the cryptospace.



SEC agents cannot explain to a federal judge what its policies and attitudes regarding virtual currencies are—or how they are going to impact the industry.

Many in the virtual currency industry have been confused and bedeviled by the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) gradual and ill-explained encroachment on their world, with frequent claims from SEC Chair Gary Gensler that most cryptocurrencies should be properly seen legally as "securities" that ought to be regulated by his agency. That would potentially make lots of legit businesses suddenly illegal dealers in "unregistered securities."

In a decision last week in an ongoing bankruptcy case of Voyager Digital Holdings, U.S. bankruptcy Judge Michael E. Wiles in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York laid into SEC agents for their perplexing and officious manner of trying to force through their attitudes about cryptocurrencies-as-securities.

Judge Wiles finds this situation highly aggravating, noting that "Voyager operated, and Binance.US currently operates, in a regulatory environment that at best can be described as highly uncertain."

Source https://reason.com/2023/03/16/federal-judge-blasts-sec-for-poorly-argued-attempts-to-claim-cryptocurrencies-must-be-regulated-by-them/

[zasad@]

However, a judge disagrees with the SEC hehehe. There is also uncle Gary's case against Ripple Labs. Why has it not come to a conclusion if the SEC really can interpret and implement the rules and regulations in accordance to US law? It is very clear to anyone who follows cryptonews that uncle Gary and his team are having difficulties  because the rules are outdated and will kill the innovation being brought by the cryptospace.



SEC agents cannot explain to a federal judge what its policies and attitudes regarding virtual currencies are—or how they are going to impact the industry.

Many in the virtual currency industry have been confused and bedeviled by the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) gradual and ill-explained encroachment on their world, with frequent claims from SEC Chair Gary Gensler that most cryptocurrencies should be properly seen legally as "securities" that ought to be regulated by his agency. That would potentially make lots of legit businesses suddenly illegal dealers in "unregistered securities."

In a decision last week in an ongoing bankruptcy case of Voyager Digital Holdings, U.S. bankruptcy Judge Michael E. Wiles in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the Southern District of New York laid into SEC agents for their perplexing and officious manner of trying to force through their attitudes about cryptocurrencies-as-securities.

Judge Wiles finds this situation highly aggravating, noting that "Voyager operated, and Binance.US currently operates, in a regulatory environment that at best can be described as highly uncertain."

Source https://reason.com/2023/03/16/federal-judge-blasts-sec-for-poorly-argued-attempts-to-claim-cryptocurrencies-must-be-regulated-by-them/

I will also quote a little, the SEC has its own position, which they do not want to speak openly:
"And when he insisted on clarification from the SEC, its agents "initially asked if it could state its position only to me on an in camera basis, but I denied that request and ruled that to the extent the SEC wanted to say something further about its objection, it ought to be stated in the public forum, where all other interested parties could hear and understand the SEC's position.""
https://reason.com/2023/03/16/federal-judge-blasts-sec-for-poorly-argued-attempts-to-claim-cryptocurrencies-must-be-regulated-by-them/

In Ripple v. The SEC has not yet put an end to it, and Ripple has suffered huge losses in legal costs and has not been able to fully develop its project for several years.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. Yes, Ripple Labs suffered losses in legal costs, however, the SEC is shown to be making cases not backed by clear regulations. If you are arguing for the SEC, do you really think that uncle Gary is a competent SEC chairman? I would very much disagree if you say yes hehehe.

Ripple had a small victory against the SEC on the Hinman documents. This proves that the SEC is not very transparent on their crackdowns on the different projects in the cryptospace. We already know that they do not have a real basis on what is an illegal security and what is not. Let us hope the Hinman documents will help classify much of the projects we support.



Ripple has secured a small victory against the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) — shutting down the agency’s motion to seal internal files known as the “Hinman Speech documents.”

Those documents consist of SEC drafts and emails relating to a speech given by William Hinman, former Director of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance, more than four years ago.

Hinman’s speech reportedly indicated the agency did not consider ether a security at the time. Ripple lawyers have fought to learn more about how Hinman came to that conclusion, which could impact XRP’s own classification.

Source https://blockworks.co/news/ripple-sec-hinman

[zasad@]

@zasad@. Yes, Ripple Labs suffered losses in legal costs, however, the SEC is shown to be making cases not backed by clear regulations. If you are arguing for the SEC, do you really think that uncle Gary is a competent SEC chairman? I would very much disagree if you say yes hehehe.

Ripple had a small victory against the SEC on the Hinman documents. This proves that the SEC is not very transparent on their crackdowns on the different projects in the cryptospace. We already know that they do not have a real basis on what is an illegal security and what is not. Let us hope the Hinman documents will help classify much of the projects we support.



Ripple has secured a small victory against the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) — shutting down the agency’s motion to seal internal files known as the “Hinman Speech documents.”

Those documents consist of SEC drafts and emails relating to a speech given by William Hinman, former Director of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance, more than four years ago.

Hinman’s speech reportedly indicated the agency did not consider ether a security at the time. Ripple lawyers have fought to learn more about how Hinman came to that conclusion, which could impact XRP’s own classification.

Source https://blockworks.co/news/ripple-sec-hinman

You asked an interesting question, which side am I on? I hate regulators, but in this market a lot of people and companies have already lost money, so regulation is needed, and without it further development is impossible. But not according to the laws of 1946.

https://twitter.com/iampaulgrewal/status/1658271335066505217
"The SEC also said that the public statements by Chair Gensler are not formal guidance or policy statements from the SEC and the public cannot rely on them as such. 5/7"
"Overall the SEC’s response reinforces Coinbase’s longstanding concern that our industry does not have clarity on what the SEC may consider to be within or outside its jurisdiction at any time, and it is likely to continue changing its mind along the way. 6/7"
paulgrewal.eth(C)

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. I am not asking you which side you will be on if being forced to choose. I am only making an argument if we can trust uncle Gary and the SEC to give a fair assessement on the exchanges, services and the projects in the cryptospace.

What is really shown to us is they do not regulate the cryptospace to protect the consumers. What they are doing is they use regulation to protect the interests of their backers from Wall Street and Main Street. If you did not notice, the cryptospace can become a big competitor against the traditional banking system.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. I am not asking you which side you will be on if being forced to choose. I am only making an argument if we can trust uncle Gary and the SEC to give a fair assessement on the exchanges, services and the projects in the cryptospace.

What is really shown to us is they do not regulate the cryptospace to protect the consumers. What they are doing is they use regulation to protect the interests of their backers from Wall Street and Main Street. If you did not notice, the cryptospace can become a big competitor against the traditional banking system.

Cryptocurrencies will not become competitors to the banking system. They will either be banned like in Pakistan or they will be heavily regulated like commercial banks. Defi projects will also have whitelists if you want to interact with them and KYC providers. The SEC will listen to the interests of the state and large banks that are its shareholders. I don't want to choose between shit and manure.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. I do not disagree. The regulators will certainly choose to make criminals out of innocent users first before they give up their campaign on shutting down the cryptospace heheheh. It cannot be killed, however. There is no other way for us in having real ownership over our digital assets except through decentralized ledgers and databases. People will keep using them.

[zasad@]

@zasad@. I do not disagree. The regulators will certainly choose to make criminals out of innocent users first before they give up their campaign on shutting down the cryptospace heheheh. It cannot be killed, however. There is no other way for us in having real ownership over our digital assets except through decentralized ledgers and databases. People will keep using them.

https://metamask.io/
https://consensys.net/terms-of-use/
4.3 Taxes. Each party will be responsible, as required under applicable law, for identifying and paying all taxes and other governmental fees and charges (and any penalties, interest, and other additions thereto) that are imposed on that party upon or with respect to the transactions and payments under this Agreement. All fees payable by you are exclusive taxes unless otherwise noted. We reserve the right to withhold taxes where required.

I don’t know how many decentralized services and wallets there will be in 3-5 years, but all the popular wallets and services that exist now will most likely work with regulators for a while.

[bbc.reporter]

@zasad@. It is a compliance nightmare for development teams that are located with in American jurisdiction. They're choices are to leave or be taken down by the United States of America hehehe. I not be shocked if the next stage for US regulators is to impose KYC on users personal wallets. What use would the innovation brought by these decentralized ledgers and databases if we cannot be in full control of our digital assets?

America has also been losing their lead in blockchain development. Their share of developers has fallen from 40% down to 29%.



Crypto and blockchain technologies are the next wave of the Internet, with the potential to fundamentally change money, the financial system, and the Internet more broadly. That the U.S. is losing market share in blockchain software development highlights the need for the country to take action to preserve its preeminence in financial markets and related technologies.

Source https://www.developerreport.com/developer-report-geography

[zasad@]

@zasad@. It is a compliance nightmare for development teams that are located with in American jurisdiction. They're choices are to leave or be taken down by the United States of America hehehe. I not be shocked if the next stage for US regulators is to impose KYC on users personal wallets. What use would the innovation brought by these decentralized ledgers and databases if we cannot be in full control of our digital assets?

..

The more SEC will complicate the lives of crypto projects, the more dissatisfaction will be. MICA will be implemented in Europe and all wallets must be verified.
Large DEFI projects will also follow these principles and introduce whitelisting. I say that freedom will soon end. Other projects will also work, but not with the same liquidity and reliability.