Do you accept ?

[Call_LSI]

So why did SEC now accepts that everything apart from Bitcoin is a security? This makes me smile that they keep Bitcoin out of the hook but is it true that all other crypto projects can be considered a security?

What do you think? Oh, and here you go, before you ask where I read this news from

https://cryptomaton.medium.com/sec-everything-apart-from-bitcoin-is-a-security-ef371b1f0bd3

[1715012648]

1715012648

[1715012648]

1715012648

[1715012648]

1715012648

[1715012648]

1715012648

[1715012648]

1715012648

[_act_]

Securities are issued by organizations, almost all the altcoins are issued by known developers.

Bitcoin is decentralized, altcoins are not decentralized.

Satoshi Nakamoto is not known, it makes bitcoin to look like commodities like gold and silver. It makes bitcoin to look natural, although it is artificial.

See the altcoins getting more centralized, going from PoW to PoS, many of them now are using PoS including ether.

See stable coins which they mention more, they are centralized, they are all securities.

See DeFi too which are definitely securities too.

[seoincorporation]

Is important to understand how bitcoin is a global tool, and not only a USA tool. And each country is in its right to see bitcoin as the way it works better for them. As a good example, we can see how El Salvador decide to make bitcoin a coin, and that works fine for them, but for other countries, Bitcoin is a Digital Asset or a Security... So, it depends on each country, we don't really have global laws for cryptos yet.

[Dunamisx]

So why did SEC now accepts that everything apart from Bitcoin is a security? This makes me smile that they keep Bitcoin out of the hook but is it true that all other crypto projects can be considered a security?

No one can recognize other cryptocurrencies as securities without first considering bitcoin being the ultimate one, as regards the SEC, we can not question them because they had never supported it right from time than sending attacks upon attack to counter the acceptabilities from various institutions, but now that bitcoin had gone beyond what they can control, manage or regulate, you should expect nothing more than this kind of attacks from them, but we all know that bitcoin remains our priority digital currency and no other.

[Stalker22]

So why did SEC now accepts that everything apart from Bitcoin is a security? This makes me smile that they keep Bitcoin out of the hook but is it true that all other crypto projects can be considered a security?

Well, to be clear, the SEC said that most digital assets can be considered unregistered securities, not everything. The SEC has a set of guidelines called the Howey Test, which is used to determine whether something is a security. If a cryptocurrency meets the criteria outlined in the Howey Test, then it may be considered a security. Therefore, it is not accurate to say that all other crypto projects can be considered a security, but rather it depends on the specific characteristics of each project and how they fit within the legal definition of a security.

[blockman]

So why did SEC now accepts that everything apart from Bitcoin is a security?

It's because _act_ is right. Bitcoin is decentralized and the developer of it Satoshi Nakamoto, no one knows where he is and that's just a pseudonym.
While the majority of the altcoins and also the stablecoins are issued by known people, registered people where the government can come and sue them anytime they want to. Bitcoin's nature, network, and security is maintained by its people and not just by some developers that do a thing on their developed altcoins.

[sheenshane]

So why did SEC now accepts that everything apart from Bitcoin is a security? This makes me smile that they keep Bitcoin out of the hook but is it true that all other crypto projects can be considered a security?

Well, to be clear, the SEC said that most digital assets can be considered unregistered securities, not everything. The SEC has a set of guidelines called the Howey Test, which is used to determine whether something is a security. If a cryptocurrency meets the criteria outlined in the Howey Test, then it may be considered a security. Therefore, it is not accurate to say that all other crypto projects can be considered a security, but rather it depends on the specific characteristics of each project and how they fit within the legal definition of a security.

The criteria of the Howey Test that SEC looking for and that consider Bitcoin if it is met to these criteria.

• There's an expectation of profits from the investment
• The investment of money is in a common enterprise
• Should be regulated by SEC

But the fact is Bitcoin is for everyone and SEC is only on U.S. law.
Yeah, it's true that many crypto projects may be considered securities under U.S. law, but not all.  
The determination of whether a cryptocurrency is a security or not depends on its various characteristics and how it functions.

[dothebeats]

Securities need some form of organization/issuing body in order to be recognized by the SEC. They need to have someone to pin down if what they issue turns out to be a fraud, or if the issuing body decides to scam the hell out of the people whom they released their securities to. I guess that's the main problem concerning bitcoin not being recognized as a security - it has no central figure governing its 'issuance' to the receiving parties.

[pooya87]

It is obvious for bitcoin since bitcoin is not a financial asset, but a currency, it can not be categorized as a "security" but when it comes to altcoins the definition of a security is in a way that allows SEC to categorize some of them that resemble "a tradable financial asset" as a security. Although I'd argue that since altcoins are useless and don't represent any real value, even that definition is wrong. But SEC (and the likes of it) are using these categorizations for themselves so that the government has a clear way of how to deal with these things. For example to tax the hell out of them...

[yudi09]

Not all cryptocurrencies can be considered securities.
In terms of the definition of securities, it is clear that securities are issued by the state with the aim of being able to keep investors in investing which shows one's ownership of assets. Bitcoin is not a financial asset even though Bitcoin can change hands through buying and selling transactions through the market.
Many references explain about securities so that we can draw conclusions.

[NotATether]

Not really, I don't consider Litecoin/Doge as securities for example. But they left us out of it at least so that means Bitcoin services will have less "securities" interference from the SEC. However, the greater market that deals with all cryptos at once, including exchanges, will still get hammered by them and investor sentiment from those actions will as a result leak into Bitcoin's price (among other coins).

[tbct_mt2]

If SEC can not prove a point falls into Howey test, they can not call it as a security asset.

Howey Test Definition: What It Means and Implications for Cryptocurrency

And being considered as security is not the end, that project can pay fee (it should be expensive cost) to be more matching with regulations. Regulations change with time and even if a project is fine today, they will likely have to adapt to future regulations too.

[Maxre]

So why did SEC now accepts that everything apart from Bitcoin is a security? This makes me smile that they keep Bitcoin out of the hook but is it true that all other crypto projects can be considered a security?

What do you think? Oh, and here you go, before you ask where I read this news from

https://cryptomaton.medium.com/sec-everything-apart-from-bitcoin-is-a-security-ef371b1f0bd3

I do not know what could be the reasons but I will say that they are afraid that Bitcoin might ruin them. And that's why might not accept Bitcoin and also crypto.

[AbuBhakar]

Sec uses Howey test to determine what is securities or an investment contract. The below part is there basis on their recent action and I think the only reason why Bitcoin is off the radar is because it’s founder(Satoshi Nakomoto) is anonymous and there’s no one who will be addressed for the legal action. This makes the Bitcoin the one true decentralized network compared to existing Blockchain.

The Howey test has four parts to determine if something like bitcoin is an “investment contract.” A contract exists if each is true:

• There’s an investment of money
• in a common enterprise
• in which the investor expects a profit
• the profit is derived solely from the efforts of others.

Source: https://www.cnbc.com/2022/11/21/why-protections-for-crypto-investors-are-linked-to-orange-groves.html
https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/20/how-the-sec-and-paxos-busd-fight-could-impact-the-stablecoin-market.html

[Emitdama]

SEC's recent statements indicate that they will be applying the Howey Test, which is a set of guidelines used to determine whether or not a financial instrument qualifies as a security, to all cryptocurrencies other than Bitcoin. While this decision may seem arbitrary, it is actually based on the fact that Bitcoin is decentralized and operates without the involvement of a central authority, making it less likely to qualify as a security.

SEC's determination of whether or not a particular cryptocurrency qualifies as a security is a complex and fact-specific analysis that takes into account a variety of factors, including the manner in which the cryptocurrency is marketed and sold to investors, the level of control that its developers or promoters have over its operation, and the extent to which investors rely on those developers or promoters for the success of the project.

If a cryptocurrency meets the definition of a security, it will be subject to the same regulations as any other security, including registration requirements and disclosure obligations. If a cryptocurrency is deemed not to be a security, it may still be subject to other forms of regulation, such as anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism financing laws.

[posi]

SEC's recent statements indicate that they will be applying the Howey Test, which is a set of guidelines used to determine whether or not a financial instrument qualifies as a security, to all cryptocurrencies other than Bitcoin. While this decision may seem arbitrary, it is actually based on the fact that Bitcoin is decentralized and operates without the involvement of a central authority, making it less likely to qualify as a security.

SEC's determination of whether or not a particular cryptocurrency qualifies as a security is a complex and fact-specific analysis that takes into account a variety of factors, including the manner in which the cryptocurrency is marketed and sold to investors, the level of control that its developers or promoters have over its operation, and the extent to which investors rely on those developers or promoters for the success of the project.

If a cryptocurrency meets the definition of a security, it will be subject to the same regulations as any other security, including registration requirements and disclosure obligations. If a cryptocurrency is deemed not to be a security, it may still be subject to other forms of regulation, such as anti-money laundering and anti-terrorism financing laws.

The point is that bitcoin is a decentralized project and is not managed or owned by anyone. Even if the SEC calls bitcoin a security, I wonder how they will handle bitcoin. Bitcoin is decentralized, so even with regulation, the SEC or the government cannot stop criminals from using bitcoin.
 
What the SEC is doing is like they are scaring us, they are probing the market reaction to finding a way to step in and control it. They can suppress some crypto companies and some centralized projects, but I don't believe they can suppress bitcoin or the whole market.

[BlackHatCoiner]

I don't know if I should accept bitcoin as a security. I surely do for Proof-of-Stake cryptocurrencies, because they're the definition of securities. They're issued from companies (i.e., companies funding Ethereum foundation), they represent financial instruments that are traded, and the foundation is obliged to follow the stakeholders' opinion.

Doesn't sound like bitcoin to me.

[cryptosize]

I wonder if PoW altcoins (like Monero) are considered commodities or securities.

[OcTradism]

I wonder if PoW altcoins (like Monero) are considered commodities or securities.

So far, only Bitcoin is not considered as commodity or security.

It is one of biggest reasons you should prioritize to pick Bitcoin for your portfolio. Ethereum, BNB and other altcoins have risk to be considered as commodity or security in future.

The whole cryptocurrency community are waiting for a final decision for XRP lawsuit case. It will open a gate for SEC to aim at more altcoin projects or it will reduce pressure and risk on altcoin projects if Ripple XRP succeeds to win the lawsuit or at least have a way to handle it with SEC, in peace.

I don't actually believe SEC will file that lawsuit if they see they fail it so a chance for Ripple is handling it with SEC, with money likely.

The risk against Ethereum forced Coinbase to delist Ethereum Classic months ago. I guess they thought SEC will aim at the initial project that raised fund and it is Ethereum Classic, not Ethereum.

[mv1986]

It is obvious for bitcoin since bitcoin is not a financial asset, but a currency, it can not be categorized as a "security" but when it comes to altcoins the definition of a security is in a way that allows SEC to categorize some of them that resemble "a tradable financial asset" as a security. Although I'd argue that since altcoins are useless and don't represent any real value, even that definition is wrong. But SEC (and the likes of it) are using these categorizations for themselves so that the government has a clear way of how to deal with these things. For example to tax the hell out of them...

But Bitcoin is taxed the same way as any other cryptocurrency in my place. There is no difference at all. When it comes to issuance, like ICOs and so on, there are differences in taxation compared to miners in Bitcoin. But that has different reasons.

Monero shouldn't be a security either then if Bitcoin isn't deemed a security? Or what exactly would be the difference between the two? Even if there are known people who created Monero, that doesn't matter because there are also people today maintaining Bitcoin. Monero wasn't dropped on anyone, but could be CPU mined during its early days, especially when you were familiar with remote access to AWS CPU instances. So nobody actually organized a public sale.

The SEC is trying everything to bend regulation such that they cover as many cryptocurrencies as possible.

You also said that Bitcoin is a currency, but besides El Salvador I am not aware of another country that embraces that definition. How do you get to the conclusion that it is a currency and, hence, cannot be categorized as a security? I might not be all up to date with the SEC's most recent statements.