SEC vs Binance

[zasad@]

https://paxos.com/busd-transparency/

And funds are SAFU!!
https://twitter.com/cz_binance/status/1625067495760560128

" We were informed by Paxos they have been directed to cease minting new BUSD by the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS).

Paxos is regulated by NYDFS.

BUSD is a stablecoin wholly owned and managed by Paxos."

Paxos Will Halt Minting New BUSD Tokens
https://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/paxos-will-halt-minting-new-busd-tokens-301744964.html

WHO is Next??

[NeuroticFish]

WHO is Next??

USDC and the rest; maybe Tether too.
There was a tweet at some point - as an idea backing - that maybe they'll start doing stable coins that are not pegged to Dollar; although if they do peg it to at least one fiat they'll still be in trouble, see Facebook, and even if they will be pegging it to Gold or whatever, it may not be as nice an simple as you'd think (if they want to properly back a stable coin with actual gold then its storage needs to be paid).

[pawel7777]

A rather strange situation. Allegedly the SEC has labeled it as security and is suing Paxos, which, if true, was likely the reason behind NYDFS ordering them to cease issuing new tokens.


https://twitter.com/milesdeutscher/status/1624953792872718336

That's bizarre, if anything, BNB would fall much closer to being security than BUSD.

All this fits in into operation Chokepoint 2.0 theory. Or maybe it's just a result of a geopolitic tensions between US and China, as Binance is rumoured to have quiet support of the Chinese governmet.

[stompix]

USDC and the rest; maybe Tether too.
There was a tweet at some point - as an idea backing - that maybe they'll start doing stable coins that are not pegged to Dollar;

They will peg to the Euro, then remember they have no licenses to operate there, then to the yen, remembering how they fled Japan, for a while to the yuan till he realizes that the Jack Ma story is not that funny, a bit with the Russian ruble till he fails to fall from a  window and then maybe finally both he and the others stop using those so-called stable coins and just deals as it was supposed to be, fiat vs BTC, and not IOU notes vs script generated coins.
Just an idea, but seems pretty appealing, to me at least.

And funds are SAFU!!

Of course, I mean what could possibly go wrong, other than the US freezing all Paxos funds with a click and deleting the backing of $16 billion of "stable" coins in an instant?
Some don't realize that the backing of this BUSD is done with US treasury bills and debt, not with a stash of cash hidden in Bahamas and guess who has the final saying over that.

[Plaguedeath]

USDC and the rest; maybe Tether too.
There was a tweet at some point - as an idea backing - that maybe they'll start doing stable coins that are not pegged to Dollar; although if they do peg it to at least one fiat they'll still be in trouble, see Facebook, and even if they will be pegging it to Gold or whatever, it may not be as nice an simple as you'd think (if they want to properly back a stable coin with actual gold then its storage needs to be paid).

I don't think USDC will get targeted by SEC because it was Circle who is file a report about the BUSD's reserved funds [1] so Circle have prepared anything in order to not got a same result like BUSD. According to the USDC's reserved funds [2], it's full of short term US Treasury Bills, not like BUSD where it's mostly about long term US Treasury Debt, so if BUSD want to de pegged to Dollar, they can't they can't directly sold the US Treasury Debt or they will suffer losses [3].

[1] https://blockchainreporter.net/stablecoin-issuer-circle-files-a-complaint-with-new-york-regulator-about-binances-busd/
[2] https://www.centre.io/hubfs/2022%20USDC_Circle%20Examination%20Report%20December%202022.pdf?hsLang=en
[3] https://paxos.com/wp-content/uploads/2023/02/BUSD-Monthly-Stablecoin-Reporting-January-2023.pdf

[NeuroticFish]

and just deals as it was supposed to be, fiat vs BTC, and not IOU notes vs script generated coins.
Just an idea, but seems pretty appealing, to me at least.

I think that the best use case for stable coins was arbitrage trading. For that, some sort of stable coin, preferably accepted by most exchanges, is a must.
For all the other cases, yes, the "good old" fiat would be better. For start it may deflate the market a little until only real money is in, but on long term it should be more fair.

And funds are SAFU!!

Of course, I mean what could possibly go wrong, other than the US freezing all Paxos funds with a click and deleting the backing of $16 billion of "stable" coins in an instant?

Well 1 BUSD = 1 BUSD and people don't understand that 16 billion BUSD can become easily = 1 cent. Some might need a cold shower in order to improve their math. Sorry, I was wrong, Terra has provided that math lesson, but people have still missed the point.

I don't think USDC will get targeted by SEC because it was Circle who is file a report about the BUSD's reserved funds [1] so Circle have prepared anything in order to not got a same result like BUSD.

Whether they've done their homework or not it doesn't matter. They still may get checked. And I've read that people started moving their funds from USDC to USDT (which imho is just as bad, or actually even worse).

[stompix]

Well 1 BUSD = 1 BUSD and people don't understand that 16 billion BUSD can become easily = 1 cent. Some might need a cold shower in order to improve their math. Sorry, I was wrong, Terra has provided that math lesson, but people have still missed the point.

But, but, 1 LUNA =1 LUNA if you don't sell, right?  
And no, some will never learn, and some don't want to as they don't even care about crypto, for them those stable coins are the bridge to trade, as you mentioned for arbitrage and at the same time give them a false sense of security as they can withdraw those to their wallet and think it's not like a bank when in reality is worse.

I don't think USDC will get targeted by SEC because it was Circle who is file a report about the BUSD's reserved funds [1] so Circle have prepared anything in order to not got a same result like BUSD.

Or, a far simple version, they ratted out Binance so they will get a moment or two of peace and maybe enough time to come up with a solution.
And speaking of a solution, as mentioned above, they could go another way, they could issue stable coins in Qatari riyal, UAE dirham or Omani rial, since all of them are actually pegged to the USD,  it doesn't change anything from a user point of view.

 

[mindrust]

SEC is a hypocrite. Why don't they start with the USDT (or USDC) first and then sue BUSD? The answer is, they don't want competition. It is OK when Binance issuing USDT like a mad man and when somebody else does it oh no suddenly it is the end of the world. Shutting BUSD would potentially harm binance and if binance gets harmed every other US crypto exchange will benefit from it.

[zasad@]

SEC is a hypocrite. Why don't they start with the USDT (or USDC) first and then sue BUSD? The answer is, they don't want competition. It is OK when Binance issuing USDT like a mad man and when somebody else does it oh no suddenly it is the end of the world. Shutting BUSD would potentially harm binance and if binance gets harmed every other US crypto exchange will benefit from it.

The SEC is not a hypocrite. What the Americans cannot lead, they will break. USDC is owned by large American companies and banks: Circle, Goldman Sachs ..
USDT is probably the next candidate.
There are a lot of questions regarding Binance, who knows where this company has an office?

[user210822]

As to my opinion SEC is killing trust in $ in the first place. BUSD, USDT and others are finally just a coins. But their exchange rate is tied to $ directly. More or less. So that harms $ position most.

[zasad@]

As to my opinion SEC is killing trust in $ in the first place. BUSD, USDT and others are finally just a coins. But their exchange rate is tied to $ directly. More or less. So that harms $ position most.

If we talk about the dollar and trust, then we need to look at the country's public debt. There is not so much money in the world, but America can print a lot of dollars, and other countries cannot do it. It is impossible not to notice that USD stablecoins are being destroyed on purpose.

[NeuroticFish]

Well 1 BUSD = 1 BUSD and people don't understand that 16 billion BUSD can become easily = 1 cent. Some might need a cold shower in order to improve their math. Sorry, I was wrong, Terra has provided that math lesson, but people have still missed the point.

But, but, 1 LUNA =1 LUNA if you don't sell, right?  

True, and you'd be surprised to find out how many hope to see it also equal to 1 USD...
We both know that the only thing equal to 1 USD is 1 USD and also that its value has became smaller since I've started writing this post.
Some still believe this or that business' claims that their coin worth the same as the dollar. Yes, it does... until it's not.

The SEC is not a hypocrite.

Actually I think that these moves are not related to protecting American citizen, nor American businesses. I think that it's meant to pave the way for the upcoming CBDC. And that's, sorry, overly hypocrite.

[zasad@]

The SEC is not a hypocrite.

Actually I think that these moves are not related to protecting American citizen, nor American businesses. I think that it's meant to pave the way for the upcoming CBDC. And that's, sorry, overly hypocrite.

Very old wisdom: "What is good for a citizen is bad for the state and vice versa".
A friend who was in Davos said that the CBDC trend is a priority and by 2026 CBDC will be in Europe, the USA, Russia, Japan and other countries. This is just the beginning. And all the crypto exchanges that remain on the market will be banks. Regulation will be the same as banks, so only the largest will survive.

[Kryptowerk]

[...]
That's bizarre, if anything, BNB would fall much closer to being security than BUSD.

All this fits in into operation Chokepoint 2.0 theory. Or maybe it's just a result of a geopolitic tensions between US and China, as Binance is rumoured to have quiet support of the Chinese governmet.

Exactly. But it's not about logic, rather it's about the message and effect it may have on similar stable coins.

It's a scary development, but of course similar moves from SEC were to be expected for quite a while now. I'd guess this is just the beginning of a huge crackdown on crypto with a shift towards official, centralized government-friendly organizations ruling over stable-shitcoins.

[NeuroticFish]

Actually I think that these moves are not related to protecting American citizen, nor American businesses. I think that it's meant to pave the way for the upcoming CBDC. And that's, sorry, overly hypocrite.

Very old wisdom: "What is good for a citizen is bad for the state and vice versa".
A friend who was in Davos said that the CBDC trend is a priority and by 2026 CBDC will be in Europe, the USA, Russia, Japan and other countries. This is just the beginning. And all the crypto exchanges that remain on the market will be banks. Regulation will be the same as banks, so only the largest will survive.

That's correct. It's an unfortunate reality we should not deny.
While the migration to bitcoin standard would have been much more beneficial for the citizen, ... that old wisdom you posted tells the story.
So we'll get CBDCs. However, as you said, the largest, the "fittest" will survive. And we know that the current stable coins are not so fit and, excepting Tether, they're not large either. So.. I don't see why they're bashing them already... unless they really want to implement into CBDCs all the bad features we're afraid of and we're talking about every time CBDCs come into discussion (full control of the state on people's money, from history of transactions to seizing the funds from inside people's wallets). And then no sane individual would touch those. Something doesn't seem to add up...

[goldkingcoiner]

The SEC is not a hypocrite.

Actually I think that these moves are not related to protecting American citizen, nor American businesses. I think that it's meant to pave the way for the upcoming CBDC. And that's, sorry, overly hypocrite.

Exactly my thoughts on the entire matter. They just want to get rid of competition before unleashing the horror of their dictatorial digital currency. What they unfortunately have no realized is how futile their attempts will be since we already have Bitcoin. And they will not be able to destroy Bitcoin or its value. Anybody with an IQ higher than room temperature knows this and will not give up their Bitcoin over some pseudo-crypto that the government quickly put together out of panic because their current monetary system is being effectively attacked by Bitcoin and even altcoins...

[yhiaali3]

They will peg to the Euro, then remember they have no licenses to operate there, then to the yen, remembering how they fled Japan, for a while to the yuan till he realizes that the Jack Ma story is not that funny, a bit with the Russian ruble till he fails to fall from a  window and then maybe finally both he and the others stop using those so-called stable coins and just deals as it was supposed to be, fiat vs BTC, and not IOU notes vs script generated coins.
Just an idea, but seems pretty appealing, to me at least.

Very attractive to me too, this is the idea that inspired the invention of bitcoin I think.

Linking cryptocurrencies to any other stablecoin or fiat will not solve the problem, but rather will divert the problem to another direction and create a new one.

The only solution is to disengage from the dollar, fiat as a whole, or any stable coin, and link to a decentralized coin that is not controlled by anyone and is not subject to any party, state, or economy, as if I am talking about Bitcoin??!!!

The idea seems very difficult at the moment, but I am confident that it will be realized in the future.

[x88]

Does anyone know why SEC involve in blockchain? Why shouldn't the US open a new organization to work on regulated btc instead? Is it good to apply the rule from the stock market to blockchain?

[Unbunplease]

I don't expect the SEC to have much impact on Binance. Binance could easily move to the right jurisdiction and issue a new stablecoin with ratio 1:1 to busd. Or take other steps. there are games just behind the scenes right now

[pawel7777]

I don't expect the SEC to have much impact on Binance. Binance could easily move to the right jurisdiction and issue a new stablecoin with ratio 1:1 to busd. Or take other steps. there are games just behind the scenes right now

Binance already operates in multiple jurisdictions, so it's not like they would have to move. But potentially losing access to the entire US crypto market would be a huge blow.
Regarding BUSD, I think they'd have to ditch Paxos and find a new issuer. As things are now, Paxos could still operate with already issued BUSD tokens, but not being able to issue any new ones, means stifling the growth of that market for Binance. And I don't imagine it would be practical to have two different issuers/operators of the same token.
But, at the end of the day, they could also just ditch BUSD altogether and replace it with some other existing stablecoin that SEC/NYDFS don't (yet) have a problem with.