Topic: Binance reaches deal to pay $4.3B settlement to American regulators - page 3. (Read 1330 times)

They've run a profitable business from 0 to billions in a few years. Now Binance's holding billions in banks so they'll pay the fines. It's going to be a profitable company after they've paid court fines because it's effective. It's the busiest exchange in the world.

It isn't over for CZ he's got a big lawsuit against him. Investors said they didn't know Binance was doing criminal things so they'll sue. Sizemore vs Zhao it's going to be $1B civil case. One more $1B lawsuit's against Cristiano Ronaldo's because ppl say they've invested in BNB tokens & traded after his ads hit headlines.

I'd wait and see the outcome of Binance battle with the SEC which is still a work in progress. SEC recently confirmed that they're still going after binance and that the DOJ settlement will only serve as fuel for its battle with Binance. Till all the legal battles that Binance has settles down, I won't be too involved with using that exchange as much as I used to. Binance is already losing its market share to the likes of Bybit, OKX amd Kucoin but I don't think any of these exchanges have what it takes to completely dethrone Binance — so best play imo, it's to wait and see how it plays out.

If Binance survives the legal hurdles, then definitely; BNB will see another all time high.

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2023-12-08/sec-says-its-binance-case-should-advance-despite-doj-settlement

CZ's going to be involved inside Binance because it's his company he won't let go or be pushed outside. BNB won't lose value because it'll gain when bull season makes ppl buy bitcoin so the market's going to be steady.

A fully regulated Binance with new CEO could help ETF approval so it could be a new beginning for crypto in America. I don't know how a new start for Binance's going to affect other countries but if exchanges scandals & allegations end it's good for crypto.

CZ did nothing compared to SBF. We could say CZ did a minor offense (misdemeanor?) while SBF did all of the contrary. By paying the $4B fine, CZ will be facing minimal jail time. He won't lose his fortune, as well as his reputation. Whenever he gets to keep his shares on Binance or lose it all, is yet to be seen. The court will ultimately decide CZ's sentence.

I see the current series of events as a new beginning for Binance exchange and the crypto industry as a whole. Confidence will be restored, while industry players will work closely with regulators in the long run. CZ can still have an influence over Binance without the need to be a CEO. He will be more of an advisor to the company than anything else. Who knows if BNB is bound to return to its former glory soon?

I don't claim to know enough about the facts of the terms of the pleadings nor the exact dynamics of the negotiations (except conjecturing that there is a bit of extra political animosity and perhaps even xenophobia built in) in order to conjecture with too many details, but if CZ were to attempt to get out of his plea (or the settlement agreement), then the justice department and the various other agencies would likely want to either play hard ball or to create the impressions of playing hardball, so they might suggest that everything all of the previous charges are back on the table and that they are even throwing in some extra charges that were not previously charged.. (even though that might end up constituting retaliatory prosecution).  I am not even claiming to know exactly what the charges were in terms of which ones had intent and which ones did not have intent (or the level of intent) and the elements of the various crimes that would have had to have been proven in order to convict (absent un plea), so when someone pleas to various charges, he has to admit to the various facts that support the elements of the crime, and even have to admit to the conclusions that their actions and the facts constitute crimes as alleged... So in other words, there is kind of an outline facts and specifics that they would have to proclaim are not necessarily true, even though previously they had sworn under oath that they were true.  It is a kind of complicated position to take.


Intent to commit a crime is harder to prove than no intent... because it is a lower barrier of merely just showing various actions and certain responsibilities that CZ had, and then he is responsible for his actions and even various neglecting to do certain things (such as putting rules and practices into place that would prevent or lessen the crimes from happening).


Part of the settlement (plea) involves agreeing that certain agencies are able to detailedly monitor Binance for 5 years, and many of those terms should already be outlined, but having the terms outlined and putting them into practice can end up being quite onerous for any company to have comply with intense monitoring... and maybe de facto Binance would end up becoming more burdened than regulated exchanges, and perhaps even having to provide way more documentations and insights into the operations of the exchange than already existing regulated exchanges.


Those are pretty BIG assumptions that: 1) Sam is ever going to get released in his lifetime.. sure it is possible, but it is not a given, and 2) he does not have money squirreled away.  Sure the various legal defenses are likely costing a lot of money, but I doubt that Sam is broke - even though he is a bit of a degenerate gambler, so it may well be that he is not very good with his personal finances.


That is true that CZ seems to have a lot of financial resource, yet even the last year, it is quite amazing how much trade volume that Binance has lost.. but they do keep going so presumptively they are still profitable, even though many 10s of billions of dollars of value were removed from their platform.


You keep asking seemingly dumb questions that have been asked and answered several times. It is like you are purposefully playing dumb and it is getting more and more difficult to even close to take you seriously.

Yes.. the plea involves CZ stepping down as Binance CEO for three years, but he does not have to sell any shares and he does not have to give up his board seat.


It's becoming more and more apparent that arabspaceship123 is not even trying to engage with genuine facts and arguments... just repeatedly exaggerating and perhaps reframing the same dumb-ass unsupported talking points.


Yes, you supposedly recognize that there is a difference, but you don't know why there is a difference in the sentencing, and you keep stating that SBF is the one who is being treated unfairly, when the facts and logic are likely the opposite.. but you state the opposite of reality because you are persistent in your desire to put out disingenuine bullshit... poor widdo SBF... it sucks that CZ is being favored.. whine, whine, whine....

I don't have personal feelings against SBF or CZ I haven't met them I don't know them. I didn't like FTX or Binance being too big that's it. I know their crimes aren't the same so their sentencing's going to be different but it doesn't look fair when one's facing over 100 years but the other's looking at 18 months max.

Please, in the US not a single banker who was part of the 2008 crash, that had consequences pretty much for the whole world, got arrested. Just some fines, and that's it. Do we want to talk about Bernie Madoff, one of the biggest scammer of the US history (together with SBF at this point)? There were a ton of red flags about his activity and they arrested him when he had already ruined a ton of people and was an old guy. And now, for some reason, you are here chasing down CZ like he's the only one in the world who ever got money he wasn't supposed to accept. I don't understand, it looks like you have something personal against CZ

SBF's did fraud on unbelievable scale so he's going to be made example by the American govt. He's going to spend many years of his life away from society. He's going suffer when he's released because he won't have money. CZ getting max 18 months looks light because of the plea deal. At least when CZ's going to be released to society his billionaire status won't be altered.

He's resigned from Binance but what's going to happen to his Binance shares. In America are convicted money launderers allowed to keep shares in companies they've used to launder?

Say CZ's team ends up wanting to suggest that the plea was done under false pretenses as you said. Though he has no intent to commit the crime, will he be able to settle a deal still after this and no more than 6 months in prison?  No intent to commit a crime seems very hard to prove since he is well advised being a big exchange with legal team.

And if proven there is a crime though with no intention, will the authorities also get hold of binance.com? As many have said ts the main Binance.com is the target of all these.

Why should Binance file for bankruptcy? The American Department of Justice had access to all the documents, they checked the whole exchange, and trust me, if they would have found something bad, FTX style, Binance would already be dead. If the best they managed to get was CZ stepping down as CEO and a fine, huge fine but still a fine, then it means that despite all the FUD Binance is a solid exchange. If they had no funds of course the DoJ would do something about it, but it looks like this is not the case.

You seem to continue to want to argue backwards in terms of trying to equate CZ as if he were even close to as bad as SBF, and so in that regard, you fail/refuse to recognize and appreciate that there are variations in kinds of crimes that are charged, levels of intent (as mentioned by Philip), and even differences between cooperation versus contesting charges (including working out some kind of a settlement agreement that also surely differentiates CZ from SBF (as also referred to by Philip).  It is quite a bit a BIGGER deal when anyone has breached fiduciary duties to clients as compared to some of the more amorphous charges of money laundering - but still some of the amorphous charges can also have large punishments, but they are likely not going to be considered as egregious by juries, if any one ends up getting a jury and going that far in the process... which an overwhelming majority of cases do not make it to trial (whether the trial includes a jury or not), so it is fairly typical to work out some kind of a plea, and surely people with more money are going to be in a better place to hire attorneys that are able to help them to work out plea deals, to the extent that they are not so arrogant as to not be able to work with attorneys, which publicly also seemed to be one of the difficulties that SBF was having both in terms of his going out on a dumbass public campaign to try to market his way out of his problem, but also likely problematic in terms of his belief that he would be able to testify in convincing ways when he likely had not really been very good at following coaching from attorneys, not that they are suppose to coach witnesses to lie but they can coach witnesses in terms of better ways to present answers.


From my understanding there are no terms in which CZ has to give up any ownership in Binance, and he is still able to stay on the Board of directors during the time period (isn't it 3 years?) in which he is not allowed to serve as CEO.  I am not sure if any of those terms might end up getting changed, because if some matters come into dispute (including the fact that he was not able to return to Dubai and that the govt may well be pushing for jail time longer than 18 months), other terms of the plea (settlement) could then come into question regarding if they had been entered into with sufficient levels of information on both sides (rather than possible deception that might have been at issue - or could be argued from CZ's side, if he wants to go there).


I am not sure if the matter ONLY boils down to if they can get CZ to pay the fines (remember there is a personal fine component and a company fine component) prior to the sentencing date, because surely they can work out those kinds of payment timelines that may or may not necessarily be determinative regarding whether the government pushes for more than 18 months in prison, and it is my understanding that CZ had said that he would not appeal any sentence that was 18 months or less, but he is not agreeing to any prison time that is higher than 6 months...

and sure maybe CZ's position could change on some of these matters, especially if all of the terms of the sentence are not agreed in advance in terms of what he had pled to which is admitting guilt on some of the charges in order that other charges would be dropped... so there are several advantages to both sides if there is a plea of guilt because then the govt does not have to try to prove either the  intent element (as phil mentioned) or even having to prove the underlying facts because CZ plead to the underlying facts, but if CZ (and his legal team) get the sense that he is not getting the benefit of his side of the bargain, then they might end up wanting to suggest that the plea was done under false pretenses.. which still most criminal defendants are not going to want to go down that kind of a path.. so it is unlikely that he is going to attempt to substantially argue that he was deceived into pleaing guilty.

By the way, Phil's mentioning a kind of crime that is a plea to not-intending the money laundering, which surely the facts surrounding such a crime would need to be sufficient within the plea, so there would either still be intentions to certain acts or even levels of negligence or gross recklessness that would rise to the level of criminality.  There are also kinds of crimes that are called "strict liability" in which performing the restricted act is enough to constitute a crime, and intention is not required to be proven for those kinds of acts that are constituted as strict liability crimes.. Many times strict liability comes into civil kinds of cases, and many times there are certain levels of intent that are needed to be proven (or plead to) in criminal cases... but not always, as Phil mentioned which would be part of the justification for lighter sentencing (or the kinds of crimes that have lower levels of punishment) - which also shows that all crimes are not the same.. They have levels and sometimes nuance.

In US law intent carries more weight then stupidity.

Ie you know you are money laundering
or you thought you were not money laundering.


Both could be the case for CZ but the government could easily prove the laundering not the intent.

So both CZ and the Gov settled on a plea deal.

Just for the non intended laundering

Money laundering isn't a small crime. If CZ didn't prevent money laundering it means he's allowed it on Binance. He didn't steal money from customer like SBF so CZ isn't a thief but he did admit crimes of laundering money.

I don't know what's going to happen to his shares in Binance. Is he going to keep ownership?

We're expecting him to pay his dues before it's time to go to court so if he pays the fines he'll be expecting 18 months. If CZ doesn't pay before he's in court he's going to get more than 18 months.

he plead guilty to not being a regulated exchange in the US. there were not charges to suspect him of co-mingling users funds(fraud)
he plead guilty to not following the regulations of sanctioned countries(laundering). which he admits he didnt prrevent


his plea's come with a 18 month possible sentence, but he has until february to pay the fines(his fines not binance company fines) which can reduce further/remove the sentence if paid before february

We know SBF is a fraudster but CZ didn't help FTX investors when he controlled 20% stake in FTX. Binance received $2.1B for shares they paid $80M to buy. Is CZ better than SBF? CZ wouldn't plead guilty to money laundering if he's innocent. SEC said CZ engaged in calculated evasion of the law. His bail allowed him to travel to his home in Dubai but a judge blocked his travel until his sentencing in Feb 24.

CZ isn't going home to fly home he's staying in America until his sentencing. He'll face max 18 months jail but SBF's max is 100 years how's that fair? When they get sentenced next year it's going to be the end of SBF & CZ chapters of biggest crypto exchange crimes.

My concerned here is the faith of the Binance exchange user.
Binance is a reputable exchange so if they could please guilty and accepted to pay the money, it is either of two reasons either they are simply obeying government or the jurisdiction orders to subdue the rumours or they are really guilty of the accusations.
Such occurances could yield about doing about Bitcoin especially to those who are yet to embrace Bitcoin.
Hence I expected Binance to come render some apologies and also the government to come tender some prof of the Binance illegal indulgences.

@AmoreJaz. Also, it appears that there are many people in the forum who underestimate Binance's revenues and cashflows. These rumors of insolvency are only either fud or they are being supported by people who are hoping or wanting that Binance become insolvent hehehe.

In any case, people have the right to hate CZ. However, if he did not leave Binance and plead guilty, it would have been worse for the users of Binance, the exchange and the cryptospace.

CZ's last sacrifice was himself.

do take note that CZ just stepped out from his position. it is not that he will be in jail already because of his wrongdoing. i won't compare CZ with SBF. they have very different approach in leadership. i strongly believe that binance won't file their bankruptcy because their previous leader didn't misapproriate their funds. it is just because of technicality issues with authorities. whereas, SBF lived a luxury life and i am on the side that he did get addicted in gambling as per rumours.

Exactly. No form of ill-intent, not a sliver in sight for us to actually second-guess Binance's credibility, and as a matter of fact we're even given guarantees in the past courtesy of the bank runs that the public did to test whether Binance is really safe. CZ himself became a beacon of safety (albeit as a meme) years prior thanks to the funds are safu joke but what the hell. Months ago I was a devout advocate that he's never going to do anything wrong as I've done my business with binance for quite some time now without any problems, turns out he's just yet another person willing to game the system for his benefit, he just made sure to leave his enterprise out of his dirty work unlike SBF who actively leveraged his own business to make illegal profit.

I don't care about what SBF said, especially after during his court trial he pretty much replied to every single question with "I don't remember", so it's interesting to see that he can actually remember something all of a sudden. Anyway it's not CZ the one who decided to setup and exchange with the final goal to scam people, it was SBF, he is the villain in this situation. Or were you hoping that he could scam even more people?