Bitcoin Is Not Crypto, The SEC Confirms

[Cookdata]

The SEC distinguishes Bitcoin from other cryptocurrencies and considers it to be a decentralized digital cash, exempting it from the classification of "security" that applies to many other tokens.

Bitcoin, due to its decentralized nature, market cap, and lack of involvement by its founder, does not fit the criteria of a security according to them.

Strap in boys and girls. Space shuttle launch in T-minus 10 and counting...

Source: https://www.forbes.com/sites/martinrivers/2023/07/31/bitcoin-is-not-crypto-the-sec-confirms/

When Bitcoin came into existence, Gary Gensler has not even had dream that a day will come to be US SEC chairman, if his predecessor didn't recognized bitcoin as security or crypto or whatever he choose to call it, he should have known better to live bitcoin alone from the genesis. Bitcoin never did an ICO, never sold any token, never did a public offering. All the altcoins are responsible for these creativities, they should deal with it instead of bringing bitcoin along any time they tried to fight the crypto communities they feel they can toy around anytime they like.

Bitcoin sentiments aside, Isn't obvious that the US government holds bitcoin as well, I expect them to play by politics and their own rule in other to stay ahead of other investors, they have thousands of bitcoin under their custody that they are yet to sell because they see the vision of satoshi that is why they are yet to offload this Bitcoin on the market, just 2 days ago the court freed SBF of his crime for donating Bitcoin to the politicians. If that had happened to be outside the US, they will never allow the public to rest with their useless headlines and crypto hunts.

[1714259828]

1714259828

[1714259828]

1714259828

[Agbe]

Op I must say the truth, I don't understand you and US SEC. How on Earth someone would come and tell me that bitcoin is not cryptocurrency. Okay let us look it from the General English Perspective. Cryptocurrency is the general name given to all those coins that in the blockchain and bitcoin is also one of them. Now bitcoin is the particular name given to a coin among other coins in the blockchain, therefore, bitcoin is also a cryptocurrency. And the way I am looking at it, since the SEC could not control or do anything to bitcoin upon all their trials they have to come up with a statement that will make people to believe that bitcoin is not bad as other altcoins.

[kryptqnick]

The SEC distinguishing between Bitcoin and altcoins isn't news, and they've just reiterated their position once again. It also seems to me that the article's author on Forbes simply make a clickbait title because nowhere in the article does the SEC actually say that Bitcoin isn't crypto. It is said that it's not a security, and other cryptos are considered securities by the SEC, but that's a totally different thing from saying Bitcoin isn't crypto.
But my question is why Bitcoin is taxed as an asset in the US, despite the SEC rightfully considering it more of a currency than an asset. Shouldn't Bitcoin be tax-free, then, the way fiat is? There's still income tax, of course, but that's a different thing.

[Sayeds56]

The SEC distinguishes Bitcoin from other cryptocurrencies and considers it to be a decentralized digital cash, exempting it from the classification of "security" that applies to many other tokens.

Recognizing the unique characteristic of Bitcoin is highly promising  development, as it could open the door for many EFTs applicants including BlackRock to gain approval from SEC. This approval has the potential to act as a catalyst, triggering significant buying activity  in Bitcoin market. It appears as prominent investors are waiting for this approval to take entry in market.

[tbct_mt2]

Recognizing the unique characteristic of Bitcoin is highly promising  development, as it could open the door for many EFTs applicants including BlackRock to gain approval from SEC. This approval has the potential to act as a catalyst, triggering significant buying activity  in Bitcoin market. It appears as prominent investors are waiting for this approval to take entry in market.

Bitcoin is Bitcoin, unique and you can talk about Bitcoin as simple as that.

Is it a commodity?
Is it a security?
Is it a whatever term will be called in future?

It is not big deal if we can use Bitcoin in whatever ways and use cases we want. Freedom to use it and freedom to call it, it is Bitcoin.

SEC. can submit legislation to change their policies and regulations so what they consider Bitcoin is today might be no longer valid and applicable in future.

But I have my strong belief that no one, no government, no agency will be able to completely ban and kill Bitcoin.

[DudeAtWork420]

Bitcoin, due to its decentralized nature, market cap, and lack of involvement by its founder, does not fit the criteria of a security according to them.

They should know before hand that Bitcoin is a community driving asset and nobody has the soul autonomy over it. The founder did hand it over to the masses and left anonymously which made it very difficult for him to be spotted. So therefore, no single individual would claim to have invented the Bitcoin without proof attached. It is decentralised because of the nature and how the founder wanted it to be so that the masses could be in control of it and not a single individual.

[tread93]

Bitcoin is as good as gold! In fact, its even more scarce. The SEC is embracing bitcoin because they have no other option but to if they want to get in on the action! The Blackrock ETF news is huge, finally they have accepted this. Hopefully we will see some movement soon, with this halving coming up it could get a little turbulent for BTC but definitely due time to CRUSH THESE ATHs! Lets break 100k savvy!?

[Flexystar]

Wow, that is something good from the SEC side for us but it seems bad news for the SEC themselves. Isn’t this is true? SEC always wanted to brush down the use of Bitcoin but now it seems as per their own definition Bitcoin is in a escape pod ready to shoot to new multi verse. Imagine how it will benefit the individuals and institutional investors on international scales now.

I think this changes everything for the corporate worlds too and banks too. If it’s not a security then there is no rule on it that means anyone can use it the way they want?

[Ucy]

Bitcoin is simply not a centralized crypto. It's decentralized, governed by fair rules, with its decentralized participants, rather than just a central figure, monitoring the network and enforcing the rules.  So, there needs to be enough honest Network participants to make sure the rules are obeyed. . It'll be hard to violate the rules if there are many eyes watching and enforcing them. Things can easily go wrong if one or few people (who could mostly be dishonest or evil) are monitoring a large network and enforcing its rules. Which is why people should be careful with centralized cryptocurrencies as they are designed to have one or few people watching and enforcing their rules. This is why they need government enforcement or be outrightly banned.

[stompix]

Bitcoin is not Crypto, we know that for years.

Who is we?
You and some poor $5 per article blogger who does only clickbait titles?

Sometimes you can just laugh here at Sec, because Bitcoin has existed in this business industry for more than a decade, don't say that they just realized that Bitcoin is not crypto.

Oh god, there are more of you?
Do you people even think one second before typing?

Op I must say the truth, O don't understand you and US SEC. How on Earth someone would come and tell me that bitcoin is not cryptocurrency.

The author is an imbecile!
The correct title is that Bitcoin is not like the other cryptos or that cryptos =/=bitcoin!

And yet, in the context of how the digital asset marketplace has evolved since 2009, when bitcoin was created, it’s easy to see why maximalists distance themselves from the more generic term. Today, there are thousands of copycat cryptos. It’s true that a few are experimenting with innovative technologies – algorithms that bitcoin may, one day, absorb into its code – but the vast majority can be dismissed as scams and get-rich-quick-schemes.
To many in the space, crypto has become a euphemism for fraud and exploitation – the opposite of the autonomous digital cash Satoshi Nakamoto set out to create.

What the idiot tried to say was that Bitcoin is not a shitcoin, not that bitcoin is not a cryptographic currency.

[Dr.Bitcoin_Strange]

how about the other cryptocurrency (Altcoins) that they think had securities because their CEOs where known, what have they (SEC) done after some of those projects collapsed? Was every investor's fund refunded? At least every or most Bitcoin users know the risks of crypto. We know that Bitcoin's author is not known but Bitcoin is still the best among other cryptocurrencies.

[ZAINmalik75]

The SEC distinguishes Bitcoin from other cryptocurrencies and considers it to be a decentralized digital cash, exempting it from the classification of "security" that applies to many other tokens.

These are not the only few factors on which they have declared it not a security because other than BTC there are four or five more cryptocurrencies are declared as not Securities by them But as i said before BTC is the king so all eyes on me/BTC.

The SEC never made such claim. I know some people want to put bitcoin in a different category as other cryptocurrencies (rightfully so, because they're made for different purposes), but I doesn't change the fact that bitcoin is indeed a cryptocurrency.

OP has made mistake while writing the title as in the post he confirmed that SEC said that BTC is not a Security but in the title Op said BTC is not a crypto. I think OP didn't able to differentiate between these two terms. Well, And the OP is a little bit late too as this news was already shared here before like yesterday. So, Op is launching the rocket a little bit late.

BTC is a leading and the king Coin in Cryptocurrency and that's what many other members has emphasized for Dear OP.

[lionheart78]

AS I read the article, I can't see anywhere that the SEC stated that Bitcoin is not Crypto rather they clearly stated that Bitcoin unlike the majority of cryptocurrency is not a security because Bitcoin does not meet the requirement to be called a "security".  I believe the article stated that it was the Bitcoin maximalist that wanted to make Bitcoin different and make it apart from other cryptocurrency.

Talk to a bitcoin maximalist – someone who believes that bitcoin is the only digital asset with innate value – and, more likely than not, they’ll tell you the world’s oldest cryptocurrency is, in fact, ‘not crypto’ at all.

Aside from that the article is discussing about Bitcoin being not a security and the reason behind it is not a security. I believe the title of the article is a bit off from its body that discusses Bitcoin, unlike the majority of cryptocurrencies, is not a security.

[Ucy]

Well, there was this interesting point on a particular social media by some people who prefer not to call Bitcoin crypto. They wanted Bitcoin to be special or different while the name "Crypto" should be for the rest of cryptocurrencies(altcoins). Maybe they forgot that the word "crypto" was derived from cryptocurrency which all the cryptocurrencies are entitled to... , so I didn't take their talk too seriously and still prefer to use both Bitcoin and crypto interchangeably, or Crypto being the general word. If they want uniqueness, the words True Crypto should do that, while the rest, but a very few, could be called false cryptos.
So, it's like Op is saying "Bitcoin is not Altcoins" or Bitcoin is special and not like the rest... assuming he/she is part of those group of thinkers

[DooMAD]

It's as though somewhere along the line, "crypto" somehow became a word to substitute in place of "shitcoin that isn't worth naming" and some strange people now believe it to be a derogatory term.  I don't know when this happened and I definitely don't understand it. 

I accept crypto as either shorthand for cryptocurrency. or as a description for the general environment in which cryptocurrencies exist.  As such, Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency and exists within the crypto-space.


Also, people need to stop acting like the SEC matters to ~96% of the world.  It's really not that important unless you're an American. 

[Ale88]

The SEC distinguishes Bitcoin from other cryptocurrencies and considers it to be a decentralized digital cash, exempting it from the classification of "security" that applies to many other tokens.

Bitcoin, due to its decentralized nature, market cap, and lack of involvement by its founder, does not fit the criteria of a security according to them.

I mean, I find funny the "according to them" part: they set those parameters, clearly bitcoin can't fit there, everybody knew that and yet they were somehow fudding giving the impression that maybe bitcoin, at the end, could actually be a security. That's always been impossible, anyway it's nice to finally have a confirmation.

[Darker45]

I haven't read or heard the full announcement relating to this but I don't think this is what the SEC is saying. Did the SEC say Bitcoin is not crypto? Or did it only say Bitcoin is not a security?

Bitcoin is a cryptocurrency. I guess that is obvious. I know there are many Bitcoin supporters, especially those who shun other cryptocurrencies, who avoid calling Bitcoin a cryptocurrency probably because they don't want it to be categorized with the rest of what they generally label as shitcoins or scam.

I don't agree with them. Bitcoin is a digital currency which uses cryptography for secured transactions. If there are others who created other cryptocurrencies that are of poor quality, it doesn't follow that Bitcoin ceases to be a cryptocurrency.

[Sarah Azhari]

Bitcoin, due to its decentralized nature, market cap, and lack of involvement by its founder, does not fit the criteria of a security according to them.

I don't know what SEC has been for over 14 years when just know that fact of bitcoin. And what makes me laugh is SEC really doesn't know the meaning of crypto. Maybe they think centralization like USDT, USDC, and others is real crypto before, and assume Ripple is just like those tokens. and after reviewing and researching they find the fact, that Ripple and Bitcoin are really decentralized. But we don't know what their plan is, SEC is a big institution, there's no way he doesn't know that fact. I think they already bought some bitcoin, and try to create FOMO in the market.

[Baofeng]

Bitcoin, due to its decentralized nature, market cap, and lack of involvement by its founder, does not fit the criteria of a security according to them.

I don't know what SEC has been for over 14 years when just know that fact of bitcoin. And what makes me laugh is SEC really doesn't know the meaning of crypto. Maybe they think centralization like USDT, USDC, and others is real crypto before, and assume Ripple is just like those tokens. and after reviewing and researching they find the fact, that Ripple and Bitcoin are really decentralized. But we don't know what their plan is, SEC is a big institution, there's no way he doesn't know that fact. I think they already bought some bitcoin, and try to create FOMO in the market.

It's because they haven't seen crypto in the last 10 years and it's just perhaps after the huge exposure of bitcoin starting from 2017 that SEC takes notice. And it took them years to realised or deem Bitcoin as not crypto.

In any case, they really have to upgrade everything now as crypto is here to stay, specially altcoin markets.

They really need to put people that its knowledgable to crypto space and not just old and traditional economist to chair SEC.

[Sayeds56]

Bitcoin is as good as gold! In fact, its even more scarce. The SEC is embracing bitcoin because they have no other option but to if they want to get in on the action! The Blackrock ETF news is huge, finally they have accepted this. Hopefully we will see some movement soon, with this halving coming up it could get a little turbulent for BTC but definitely due time to CRUSH THESE ATHs! Lets break 100k savvy!?

You are absolutely right in comparing Bitcoin to Gold, as both assets share common characteristic, such as scarcity and store of value with the potential to act as potential hedge against inflation. The increasing interest from big institutional players in Bitcoin are indeed significant developments, and indicate growing mainstream adoption. We might see substantial buying activity in Bitcoin market, in case Blackrock ETF is approved in mid August, by SEC.