News update.
If you are a cryptoholder from America and know someone who has some funds on bittrex.us, tell them to withdraw their coins immediately. Much of the funds not being withdrawn and the their chance to get them might be closing.
Surprisingly, Bittrex faces a peculiar challenge. It’s struggling to convince over a million creditors to claim their rightful assets. The result? There’s a potential for Chapter 11 bankruptcy to turn profitable for the estate.
Since May, and with the claim filing period over, only about 36,000 clients have reclaimed approximately $143 million in crypto, as Patty Tomasco, the legal representative for the company, shared with a Delaware courtroom recently.
This represents a mere fraction. Consider the 1.6 million clientele informed about the withdrawal post the company’s U.S. and Maltese branches declared bankruptcy in May.
Source https://cryptomode.com/the-unique-case-of-bittrexs-u-s-arm-a-surplus-in-bankruptcy/
Topic: Bittrex to shut its U.S operations (Read 699 times)
Okay so regarding the SEC charges we talked about a couple of months back, it looks like Bittrex has agreed to settle and pay a 24M fine:
Your thoughts on this? It would be interesting to see what the rest (Binance, and Coinbase) is going to do as well.
Quote from: https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/08/10/bittrex-reaches-settlement-with-sec-agrees-to-pay-24m-fine/
Crypto exchange Bittrex settled charges of offering U.S. investors access to unregistered securities on Thursday, agreeing to pay a $24 million fine within two months of filing a liquidation plan for the exchange.
Your thoughts on this? It would be interesting to see what the rest (Binance, and Coinbase) is going to do as well.
The question is did they agree to pay because they are leaving? Just add it to the cost of shutting down operations and move on.
Coinbase, being a public company would have to do it differently. If they can justify that paying a fine and moving on is a better financial operation then fighting it then they might do that. But, if some shareholders think and can reasonably see fighting the case being a better option then you have to look at that too.
Binance, who knows, they will probably just pay whatever fine that comes up. They charge so much, adding a few more fees to come up with a few million dollars off the backs of their clients would not be that hard.
-Dave
Okay so regarding the SEC charges we talked about a couple of months back, it looks like Bittrex has agreed to settle and pay a 24M fine:
Your thoughts on this? It would be interesting to see what the rest (Binance, and Coinbase) is going to do as well.
Quote from: https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/08/10/bittrex-reaches-settlement-with-sec-agrees-to-pay-24m-fine/
Crypto exchange Bittrex settled charges of offering U.S. investors access to unregistered securities on Thursday, agreeing to pay a $24 million fine within two months of filing a liquidation plan for the exchange.
Your thoughts on this? It would be interesting to see what the rest (Binance, and Coinbase) is going to do as well.
I'll leave this here in case anyone has funds stuck on Bittrex.
From Thursday, it will be possible to withdraw funds from the Bittrex exchange.
https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/06/14/bankrupt-crypto-exchange-bittrex-us-set-to-allow-withdrawals-starting-thursday/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=rss&utm_campaign=headlines
From Thursday, it will be possible to withdraw funds from the Bittrex exchange.
Quote
The U.S. arm of crypto exchange Bittrex is set to open for customer withdrawals Thursday following a ruling by a Delaware bankruptcy court
https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/06/14/bankrupt-crypto-exchange-bittrex-us-set-to-allow-withdrawals-starting-thursday/?utm_medium=referral&utm_source=rss&utm_campaign=headlines
The government wants to kill this innovation by imposing old regulations where we are required to use government approved custodians to hold our assets for us and use government approved transfer agents to move our assets through them.
Bullshit!
The laws are strictly considering only financial institutions that are offering financial services to customers, it's nothing about how you decide to store or hide or safekeeping your coins.
Besides, look in what rabbit hole you've dug yourself, by claiming the government can impose this you've essentially said that any government can control Bitcoin and can decide what you're going to do with your coins, so at this point what is the point of all of this in the first place?
Also, if cryptospace innovation is being killed, the developers will move out.
You still haven't been able to give one single example of an innovation that is going to be killed by these laws.
Quote
In the cryptospace, real ownership is real custody over your digital assets only made possible through the innovation that these decentalized ledgers and databases are giving us
Weird, last time I checked Satoshi didn't ask for any money, Doge had no ICO, neither had Litecoin, and there was no IPO on Segwit but I kind of forget if I had to buy BitcoinCore from Microsoft. I'm sure I'm paying a monthly fee but I'm not sure it's Vodafone or Electrum.
So again:
What real innovation with real-world use and not a pump and dump hype garbage would be killed by this?
Hehehe it appears that you are arguing about something else. I am arguing about how the SEC might use old methods like the howey test on the different projects in the cryptospace. Those that fail this test will be considered as illegal securities that will need to register with the SEC. You do not know this or read about it in the news?
I told you already. It is underestimated that regulations on different projects, cryptocoins and tokens will kill the most important innovation that decentralized ledgers and databases have given us. Self custody of our digital assets. It might presently be a speculation, however, it is something overlooked.
I am scratching my head because you want me to argue about something else and fight me that it is what I am arguing about hehehehehee. No, I am talking about the SEC and the things that we might not have noticed.
In any case, read this again.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.62196665
The government wants to kill this innovation by imposing old regulations where we are required to use government approved custodians to hold our assets for us and use government approved transfer agents to move our assets through them.
Bullshit!
The laws are strictly considering only financial institutions that are offering financial services to customers, it's nothing about how you decide to store or hide or safekeeping your coins.
Besides, look in what rabbit hole you've dug yourself, by claiming the government can impose this you've essentially said that any government can control Bitcoin and can decide what you're going to do with your coins, so at this point what is the point of all of this in the first place?
Also, if cryptospace innovation is being killed, the developers will move out.
You still haven't been able to give one single example of an innovation that is going to be killed by these laws.
Quote
In the cryptospace, real ownership is real custody over your digital assets only made possible through the innovation that these decentalized ledgers and databases are giving us
Weird, last time I checked Satoshi didn't ask for any money, Doge had no ICO, neither had Litecoin, and there was no IPO on Segwit but I kind of forget if I had to buy BitcoinCore from Microsoft. I'm sure I'm paying a monthly fee but I'm not sure it's Vodafone or Electrum.
So again:
What real innovation with real-world use and not a pump and dump hype garbage would be killed by this?
How?
I have already mentioned it in this post.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.62196665
This is only my own speculation, however, the reason why I speculated this is from how we have witnessed the SEC regulates traditional securities. Everything uncle Gary is trying to impose on crypto are based on regulations which might be obsolete.
In any case, I agree that this is only my own assumption. However, if it is the right assumption, does it not kill innovation?
Again, what innovation?
When you buy a physical item and hold it, then you own it and you can do anything you want with it. This is real ownership. In the cryptospace, real ownership is real custody over your digital assets only made possible through the innovation that these decentalized ledgers and databases are giving us.
The government wants to kill this innovation by imposing old regulations where we are required to use government approved custodians to hold our assets for us and use government approved transfer agents to move our assets through them. This will of course be under government supervision to protect us hehehehehe.
Also, if cryptospace innovation is being killed, the developers will move out.
How?
I have already mentioned it in this post.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.62196665
This is only my own speculation, however, the reason why I speculated this is from how we have witnessed the SEC regulates traditional securities. Everything uncle Gary is trying to impose on crypto are based on regulations which might be obsolete.
In any case, I agree that this is only my own assumption. However, if it is the right assumption, does it not kill innovation?
Again, what innovation?
You could have given a real example where a company forced to take care of customers money can't innovate anymore cause for sure I haven't heard of one in my whole life.
Every single time that we have things that regulate financial companies and customer care there is this thing how this is bad for crypto for some reason when the whole thing shouldn't have existed in the first place, the whole deal of not your keys not your coins.
All the complains essentially boil down to one thing, people will not be able to invest in crypto freely because of a fee and somehow this will kill...omg!
How easy is for a guy in Kiawabuga to buy Tesla or Tsmc shares? Did it kill innovation?
Did any of those Icos that burned billion had any real life real product proven innovation?
How can normal companies invent millions of things and suddenly because crypto companies are required to deposit safely customers funds they are getting lobotomized.
Common, this is just bs and propaganda from exchanges that, like davef said, have no books and have no idea where customers money really is.
@Abiky. The approved custodian rule will kill the innovation of real ownership that it brings in web3.
How?
I have already mentioned it in this post.
https://bitcointalksearch.org/topic/m.62196665
This is only my own speculation, however, the reason why I speculated this is from how we have witnessed the SEC regulates traditional securities. Everything uncle Gary is trying to impose on crypto are based on regulations which might be obsolete.
In any case, I agree that this is only my own assumption. However, if it is the right assumption, does it not kill innovation?
@Abiky. The approved custodian rule will kill the innovation of real ownership that it brings in web3. Will the NFTs that represent your character in a game also needed to be held with an approved custodian? Character skins in web3 are also NFTs hehe, they also need everyone to register them with the SEC?
The speed of the cryptospace's development has placed the SEC in a head shaking environment hehehe. Those who can evade compliance because uncle Gary is using old rules will certainly use every chance to evade hehehehe.
The speed of the cryptospace's development has placed the SEC in a head shaking environment hehehe. Those who can evade compliance because uncle Gary is using old rules will certainly use every chance to evade hehehehe.
Of course people will evade. And there's nothing the SEC can do about it. Crypto/Blockchain tech is decentralized after all. This "approved custodian" rule will only make crypto more centralized. It will force people to use P2P exchanges or trade crypto in-person in the long run. That means less tax income for the US. Not only that, but tightening regulations will force centralized exchanges to move elsewhere.
Bittrex left the country, and Coinbase is coming up next. And God knows if Binance will also do the same soon. US customers will be left with Kraken and some other small crypto exchanges in the timebeing. But if Gary Gensler maintains his aggressive stance against crypto, there will be no exchanges left in the country.
I hope this would be over by 2025 after the new government is sworn in. That is if Republicans win the race. Otherwise, you can say bye-bye to crypto in the US for good. Maybe this is an opportunity for the EU to rise as the leading superpower for crypto/Blockchain tech development and innovation? Just my thoughts
The only exchanges left will be the ones that play by the rules.
Quoting myself:
If every time somebody wants to look at your finances, and you run, 99% of the time it's one of two things.
1) You are cooking the books
2) There are no books
The last small 1% is that even if things are 'legit' so many things done in a non GAAP way that it's never going to look legit....
1) You are cooking the books
2) There are no books
The last small 1% is that even if things are 'legit' so many things done in a non GAAP way that it's never going to look legit....
If you are afraid as a business of having an independent person come in and make sure that you as a business are doing what you say you are doing and have what you say you have then you are probably not legit.
Any business in the finance world has had to deal with that.
When the rules get loosened is when you have problems because that's when they see what they can get away with.
And...wait for it....you know what I am going to say now.....
Don't put funds in centralized exchanges...Not Your Keys Not Your Coins.
-Dave
That's very bad. If the SEC achieves this, crypto would become no different than traditional stocks. After all, one of the main advantages of crypto is financial sovereignity and personal freedom. By leaving crypto funds to an "approved custodian", we're introducing the middleman into the crypto/Blockchain space. Of course, crypto will still be decentralized. But most on/off ramps are controlled by centralized exchanges, so people won't have a way to buy/sell crypto without dealing with the "middleman issue".
Have you actually read what this is about?
What freedom and sovereignty are you talking about when this is clearly about
I'm hoping Congress makes a vote to remove Gary Gensler from office.
Why? Because half of the world can't read 3 words into a headline?
@Abiky. The approved custodian rule will kill the innovation of real ownership that it brings in web3.
How?
@Abiky. The approved custodian rule will kill the innovation of real ownership that it brings in web3. Will the NFTs that represent your character in a game also needed to be held with an approved custodian? Character skins in web3 are also NFTs hehe, they also need everyone to register them with the SEC?
The speed of the cryptospace's development has placed the SEC in a head shaking environment hehehe. Those who can evade compliance because uncle Gary is using old rules will certainly use every chance to evade hehehehe.
The speed of the cryptospace's development has placed the SEC in a head shaking environment hehehe. Those who can evade compliance because uncle Gary is using old rules will certainly use every chance to evade hehehehe.
Of course people will evade. And there's nothing the SEC can do about it. Crypto/Blockchain tech is decentralized after all. This "approved custodian" rule will only make crypto more centralized. It will force people to use P2P exchanges or trade crypto in-person in the long run. That means less tax income for the US. Not only that, but tightening regulations will force centralized exchanges to move elsewhere.
Bittrex left the country, and Coinbase is coming up next. And God knows if Binance will also do the same soon. US customers will be left with Kraken and some other small crypto exchanges in the timebeing. But if Gary Gensler maintains his aggressive stance against crypto, there will be no exchanges left in the country.
I hope this would be over by 2025 after the new government is sworn in. That is if Republicans win the race. Otherwise, you can say bye-bye to crypto in the US for good. Maybe this is an opportunity for the EU to rise as the leading superpower for crypto/Blockchain tech development and innovation? Just my thoughts
@Abiky. The approved custodian rule will kill the innovation of real ownership that it brings in web3. Will the NFTs that represent your character in a game also needed to be held with an approved custodian? Character skins in web3 are also NFTs hehe, they also need everyone to register them with the SEC?
The speed of the cryptospace's development has placed the SEC in a head shaking environment hehehe. Those who can evade compliance because uncle Gary is using old rules will certainly use every chance to evade hehehehe.
The speed of the cryptospace's development has placed the SEC in a head shaking environment hehehe. Those who can evade compliance because uncle Gary is using old rules will certainly use every chance to evade hehehehe.
@Abiky. Have you read this news article? Uncle Gary and the SEC are already starting to open discussions on an implementation of a rule that only approved custodians are allowed to hold your cryptocoins and tokens. This will disable not your keys, not your coins and expect holders to give all trust to their approved custodians.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) went too far when it proposed a new rule demanding investment firms safeguard all of their clients’ assets – including crypto – with approved custodians, according to an array of critics not often in alignment.
Source https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/05/09/sec-blasted-on-custody-proposal-by-jpmorgan-crypto-firms-and-a-fellow-agency/
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) went too far when it proposed a new rule demanding investment firms safeguard all of their clients’ assets – including crypto – with approved custodians, according to an array of critics not often in alignment.
Source https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/05/09/sec-blasted-on-custody-proposal-by-jpmorgan-crypto-firms-and-a-fellow-agency/
That's very bad. If the SEC achieves this, crypto would become no different than traditional stocks. After all, one of the main advantages of crypto is financial sovereignity and personal freedom. By leaving crypto funds to an "approved custodian", we're introducing the middleman into the crypto/Blockchain space. Of course, crypto will still be decentralized. But most on/off ramps are controlled by centralized exchanges, so people won't have a way to buy/sell crypto without dealing with the "middleman issue".
I'm hoping Congress makes a vote to remove Gary Gensler from office. It'll be good for the US-based crypto industry in the long run. Otherwise, this would be the end of crypto in America as we know it. If things go south, I believe US-based crypto customers will move to other countries with a friendly stance towards the industry. This means more taxes for foreign countries and a huge loss for the United States in the future. Just my opinion
@Abiky. Have you read this news article? Uncle Gary and the SEC are already starting to open discussions on an implementation of a rule that only approved custodians are allowed to hold your cryptocoins and tokens. This will disable not your keys, not your coins and expect holders to give all trust to their approved custodians.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) went too far when it proposed a new rule demanding investment firms safeguard all of their clients’ assets – including crypto – with approved custodians, according to an array of critics not often in alignment.
Source https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/05/09/sec-blasted-on-custody-proposal-by-jpmorgan-crypto-firms-and-a-fellow-agency/
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) went too far when it proposed a new rule demanding investment firms safeguard all of their clients’ assets – including crypto – with approved custodians, according to an array of critics not often in alignment.
Source https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/05/09/sec-blasted-on-custody-proposal-by-jpmorgan-crypto-firms-and-a-fellow-agency/
I'm wondering what does this mean for the users and their funds?
So the once famous Bittrex got Bittrekt?I guess the customers or users will have to wait for several months or years before they can get their back funds if things work out according to plan.
This is a little light on the bankruptcy filings they made;
1. Chapter 9
Quote from: https://www.uscourts.gov/services-forms/bankruptcy/bankruptcy-basics/chapter-9-bankruptcy-basics
The purpose of chapter 9 is to provide a financially-distressed municipality protection from its creditors while it develops and negotiates a plan for adjusting its debts. Reorganization of the debts of a municipality is typically accomplished either by extending debt maturities, reducing the amount of principal or interest, or refinancing the debt by obtaining a new loan
2. Chapter 11
Chapter 11 is named after a section of the U.S. Bankruptcy Code. Companies that file Chapter 11 do so in order to obtain time to restructure their debts and make a fresh start. The terms are subject to the debtor fulfilling its obligations under the plan of reorganization.
1
During a Chapter 11 proceeding, the court will help a business restructure its debts and obligations
1
During a Chapter 11 proceeding, the court will help a business restructure its debts and obligations
3. Chapter 15
Chapter 15 is a section in the U.S. Bankruptcy Code that was added in 2005 to provide for cooperation between U.S. courts and foreign courts when foreign bankruptcy proceedings touch upon U.S. financial interests.
The section was added in response to a United Nations recommendation for cooperation among nations on what it calls "cross-border insolvency."
The section was added in response to a United Nations recommendation for cooperation among nations on what it calls "cross-border insolvency."
@Abiky. What much of these cryptolovers who are arguing for regulations ignore is that regulations might threaten one of the basic innovations that the cryptospace has given us and this is the the self custody of our digital wealth.
If regulations are imposed, this implies that all coins and tokens are securities and must be registered with the SEC. This will cause a few problems because under those regulations there should be a custodian, a transfer agent, it will need certain reports, disclosures and all these other documents required by the SEC.
These requirements will also make us pay more fees to the custodians and the transfer agents.
There is also the accredited investor rules which might exclude people who are under a certain salary bracket from investing freely in the cryptospace. This will not encourage the innovation in forming community shared projects similar to what we are witnessing today. It will be very much similar to nothing we presently have in the cryptospace.
CZ, we support your use of decentralization to evade everything that you need to evade hehehehehheee.
If regulations are imposed, this implies that all coins and tokens are securities and must be registered with the SEC. This will cause a few problems because under those regulations there should be a custodian, a transfer agent, it will need certain reports, disclosures and all these other documents required by the SEC.
These requirements will also make us pay more fees to the custodians and the transfer agents.
There is also the accredited investor rules which might exclude people who are under a certain salary bracket from investing freely in the cryptospace. This will not encourage the innovation in forming community shared projects similar to what we are witnessing today. It will be very much similar to nothing we presently have in the cryptospace.
CZ, we support your use of decentralization to evade everything that you need to evade hehehehehheee.
Exactly. Fierce regulations will limit crypto's true potential to bring "banking to the unbanked". There will be so many restrictions in place that would make an ordinary person think twice before getting into the revolution. I believe the US government is doing this intentionally to scare away as much people from crypto/Blockchain tech as possible. After all, it doesn't want the US Dollar from losing ground anytime soon. While I believe decentralization will ultimately prevail, governments will not give up without a "good fight".
Like I've said before, crypto exchanges will ultimately leave the US due to the SEC's "aggressive behavior". Binance might survive because it has its own "decentralized" Blockchain network, but I cannot say the same about Coinbase and the others. Competing exchanges may deal with customers internationally, but without a decentralized chain of their own, they can be easily "cut off" from the system by mainstream governments. If all centralized exchanges die in the long run, then we'll be back to "square one". Just my opinion
I received this email from Bittrex after several years of not logging in and my account being blocked
I wonder what kind of terms of service they have now updated, since I can read them as a result of the block on my account. Not that I miss the exchange anyway.
I wonder what kind of terms of service they have now updated, since I can read them as a result of the block on my account. Not that I miss the exchange anyway.
@Abiky. What much of these cryptolovers who are arguing for regulations ignore is that regulations might threaten one of the basic innovations that the cryptospace has given us and this is the self custody of our digital wealth.
If regulations are imposed, this implies that all coins and tokens are securities and must be registered with the SEC. This will cause a few problems because under those regulations there should be a custodian, a transfer agent, it will need certain reports, disclosures and all these other documents required by the SEC.
These requirements will also make us pay more fees to the custodians and the transfer agents.
There is also the accredited investor rules which might exclude people who are under a certain salary bracket from investing freely in the cryptospace. This will not encourage the innovation in forming community shared projects similar to what we are witnessing today. It will be very much similar to nothing we presently have in the cryptospace.
CZ, we support your use of decentralization to evade everything that you need to evade hehehehehheee.
If regulations are imposed, this implies that all coins and tokens are securities and must be registered with the SEC. This will cause a few problems because under those regulations there should be a custodian, a transfer agent, it will need certain reports, disclosures and all these other documents required by the SEC.
These requirements will also make us pay more fees to the custodians and the transfer agents.
There is also the accredited investor rules which might exclude people who are under a certain salary bracket from investing freely in the cryptospace. This will not encourage the innovation in forming community shared projects similar to what we are witnessing today. It will be very much similar to nothing we presently have in the cryptospace.
CZ, we support your use of decentralization to evade everything that you need to evade hehehehehheee.
Protecting investors is only the reason being used to impose regulations and maybe in the beginning it might have been the real reason, however, the real rulers of any country who back politicians and put them in their positions in government are being used to create regulations to control different types of industries and maintain their dominance. This is why many people think regulators end in doing too much. The government does not work for you, it works for the real rulers.
Also, do you know who gives their banks a bailout during a crisis? It is you the tax payer hehehehe.
Also, do you know who gives their banks a bailout during a crisis? It is you the tax payer hehehehe.
Banks and governments always win. It's the taxpayers that always lose. You'd think governments will allow you to obtain true financial freedom with something that's outside of their reach? They will regulate crypto "down to the bone" until they diminish its dominance worldwide. Given that cryptocurrencies are decentralized by design, don't expect them to take over the traditional monetary system anytime soon.
Let's see how crypto regulations will play out in the US, especially when there's a lot of money involved in this industry. If the US goes too hard on crypto, it will miss a huge opportunity to collect taxes and gain a certain level of control over crypto transactions going through CEXs. Bittrex leaving the country may only be the "tip of the iceberg" as the worst is yet to come. The next exchange in line would be Coinbase. The exchange already threatened to leave the country if the government doesn't provide regulatory clarity. Pro-crypto US politicians better step up to the game, or you can say goodbye to the crypto industry in the US for good. Just my thoughts
@Abiky. Also, if CZ and Binance evade much of these regulations and to continue what they have been doing, it would also imply that the laws the regulators use have become limited in managing the cryptospace.
I shake my head because it was Bittrex that wanted to be regulatory compliant and they delisted much of the ICOs in the exchange on 2017. This caused Binance to become the exchange for maybe more than 80% of the market for ICO coins and tokens. However, what did it bring Bittrex for following the rules? Presently other exchanges are learning from CZ hehehe.
I shake my head because it was Bittrex that wanted to be regulatory compliant and they delisted much of the ICOs in the exchange on 2017. This caused Binance to become the exchange for maybe more than 80% of the market for ICO coins and tokens. However, what did it bring Bittrex for following the rules? Presently other exchanges are learning from CZ hehehe.
Regulations are there to protect investors against malpractices from crypto exchange companies. But too much regulations, will cause a mass exodus by said companies to other countries that are much more flexible. The US is trying to do the right thing by eliminating as much illegal activity as possible on the crypto industry. It's just that it's doing everything the wrong way. Congress needs to devise a proper regulatory framework to bring clarity to the crypto industry in the region. The first step would be to remove SEC chairman Gary Gensler from office. That would provide a sign of relief among crypto exchanges and investors alike.
I was surprised to have read about Bittrex leaving the US when it was always striving to comply with regulations. Maybe there's something else behind that made Bittrex take such a decision? Now Coinbase threatened to leave the US, so things will get interesting in the following months. Let's hope there's "light at the end of the tunnel" for the crypto industry to thrive within the US. Just my opinion
Protecting investors is only the reason being used to impose regulations and maybe in the beginning it might have been the real reason, however, the real rulers of any country who back politicians and put them in their positions in government are being used to create regulations to control different types of industries and maintain their dominance. This is why many people think regulators end in doing too much. The government does not work for you, it works for the real rulers.
Also, do you know who gives their banks a bailout during a crisis? It is you the tax payer hehehehe.
On the shutdown of Bittrex in the US and SEC actions — Bittrex Global CEO at Consensus 2023
In the above article published by Cointelegraph today, the CEO of the Bittrex platform refuted all the accusations leveled by the SEC against it, including the charge of activity without a license, explaining that the SEC has not communicated with the platform since it launched its services in the United States and did not ask it to provide it with any information regarding the legal status of the platform or regarding the work system. And Oliver Linch mentioned that the platform decided to end its activity in the United States at the end of last April because of these traces that came to represent pressure to end the platform's activity in the United States.
Oliver Linch's statements to Cointelegraph come as confirmation of what the coinbase platform had mentioned about the SEC and that it did not contact it at any time and did not request an audit of any of the licenses or activities.
In the above article published by Cointelegraph today, the CEO of the Bittrex platform refuted all the accusations leveled by the SEC against it, including the charge of activity without a license, explaining that the SEC has not communicated with the platform since it launched its services in the United States and did not ask it to provide it with any information regarding the legal status of the platform or regarding the work system. And Oliver Linch mentioned that the platform decided to end its activity in the United States at the end of last April because of these traces that came to represent pressure to end the platform's activity in the United States.
Oliver Linch's statements to Cointelegraph come as confirmation of what the coinbase platform had mentioned about the SEC and that it did not contact it at any time and did not request an audit of any of the licenses or activities.
@Abiky. Also, if CZ and Binance evade much of these regulations and to continue what they have been doing, it would also imply that the laws the regulators use have become limited in managing the cryptospace.
I shake my head because it was Bittrex that wanted to be regulatory compliant and they delisted much of the ICOs in the exchange on 2017. This caused Binance to become the exchange for maybe more than 80% of the market for ICO coins and tokens. However, what did it bring Bittrex for following the rules? Presently other exchanges are learning from CZ hehehe.
I shake my head because it was Bittrex that wanted to be regulatory compliant and they delisted much of the ICOs in the exchange on 2017. This caused Binance to become the exchange for maybe more than 80% of the market for ICO coins and tokens. However, what did it bring Bittrex for following the rules? Presently other exchanges are learning from CZ hehehe.
Regulations are there to protect investors against malpractices from crypto exchange companies. But too much regulations, will cause a mass exodus by said companies to other countries that are much more flexible. The US is trying to do the right thing by eliminating as much illegal activity as possible on the crypto industry. It's just that it's doing everything the wrong way. Congress needs to devise a proper regulatory framework to bring clarity to the crypto industry in the region. The first step would be to remove SEC chairman Gary Gensler from office. That would provide a sign of relief among crypto exchanges and investors alike.
I was surprised to have read about Bittrex leaving the US when it was always striving to comply with regulations. Maybe there's something else behind that made Bittrex take such a decision? Now Coinbase threatened to leave the US, so things will get interesting in the following months. Let's hope there's "light at the end of the tunnel" for the crypto industry to thrive within the US. Just my opinion
even though I have an account at bittrex but I have never traded there again, it's been quite a while
I am also like that, I don't really understand the conditions of the strict rules that exist in the US but if I become the owner of bittrex then I will do the same thing (close bittrex service in the US) the regulations made by the SEC are very strict even the CEO of Bittrex claims that each States has different regulations so that it makes operational costs even more expensive.
This just came out: https://decrypt.co/136947/bittrex-faces-potential-enforcement-action-sec-report
I'm not very familiar with the laws and regulations in the U.S but how can this make sense if they already announced shutting down their operations?
I'm not very familiar with the laws and regulations in the U.S but how can this make sense if they already announced shutting down their operations?
I am also like that, I don't really understand the conditions of the strict rules that exist in the US but if I become the owner of bittrex then I will do the same thing (close bittrex service in the US) the regulations made by the SEC are very strict even the CEO of Bittrex claims that each States has different regulations so that it makes operational costs even more expensive.
Quote
California: Crypto exchange Bittrex, founded in 2014 by three Amazon alumni, is shutting down its US operations, citing a regulatory environment that has made it “no longer feasible” to operate in the country. In a tweet, Bittrex co-founder and US CEO Richie Lai said it’s “not economically viable for us to continue to operate in the current US regulatory and economic environment.” All customer funds are available to withdraw until the end of April, and its global business outside the US will continue to operate.
SOURCE--
@Abiky. Also, if CZ and Binance evade much of these regulations and to continue what they have been doing, it would also imply that the laws the regulators use have become limited in managing the cryptospace.
I shake my head because it was Bittrex that wanted to be regulatory compliant and they delisted much of the ICOs in the exchange on 2017. This caused Binance to become the exchange for maybe more than 80% of the market for ICO coins and tokens. However, what did it bring Bittrex for following the rules? Presently other exchanges are learning from CZ hehehe.
I shake my head because it was Bittrex that wanted to be regulatory compliant and they delisted much of the ICOs in the exchange on 2017. This caused Binance to become the exchange for maybe more than 80% of the market for ICO coins and tokens. However, what did it bring Bittrex for following the rules? Presently other exchanges are learning from CZ hehehe.
@Abiky. What every country needs is clear regulatory guidance on the cryptospace. This is the problem with the US SEC and Gary Gensler. They crack down on the cryptospace, however, they do not have clear rules and regulations to back their cases. Everything is based on traditional finance. I appears that new technology needs new types of regulations.
A good example of this is Ripple. The lawsuit is not going anywhere because they cannot charge Ripple Labs with anything.
A good example of this is Ripple. The lawsuit is not going anywhere because they cannot charge Ripple Labs with anything.
Lawmakers really need to educate themselves about crypto/Blockchain tech before coming forward with regulations. As you've said before, existing laws/regulations were made at a time when crypto didn't even exist. I hope that US Congress gets its act together by devising a clear regulatory framework for the entire industry. Only then, crypto/Blockchain tech will be able to grow within the US without obstacles and/or limitations.
Crypto advocates need to "fight" in every way possible, to help prevent the industry from leaving the country (US). If Ripple, Coinbase, and other big names in the crypto industry win lawsuits, then we'd be off to a good start. Let's hope all goes well in the long run. Just my opinion
@Abiky. What every country needs is clear regulatory guidance on the cryptospace. This is the problem with the US SEC and Gary Gensler. They crack down on the cryptospace, however, they do not have clear rules and regulations to back their cases. Everything is based on traditional finance. It appears that new technology needs new types of regulations.
A good example of this is Ripple. The lawsuit is not going anywhere because they cannot charge Ripple Labs with anything.
A good example of this is Ripple. The lawsuit is not going anywhere because they cannot charge Ripple Labs with anything.
They have been struggling to find a new banking partner for some time now, and they also said they'll be limiting their investments in the U.S so I wouldn't be surprised if they do leave.
Coinbase's CEO also made a statement today, saying that relocating to somewhere else[1][2] is not off the table.
[1] https://blockworks.co/news/could-coinbase-leave-us
[2] https://www.coindesk.com/business/2023/04/18/coinbase-could-move-away-from-us-if-no-regulatory-clarity-ceo-brian-armstrong/
Coinbase's CEO also made a statement today, saying that relocating to somewhere else[1][2] is not off the table.
[1] https://blockworks.co/news/could-coinbase-leave-us
[2] https://www.coindesk.com/business/2023/04/18/coinbase-could-move-away-from-us-if-no-regulatory-clarity-ceo-brian-armstrong/
Coinbase is even bigger than Bittrex. If it leaves, it will be a huge blow to the US in the long run. The country needs pro-crypto politicians, in order to devise a proper regulatory framework for the industry. Last time I've read the news, a Republican congressman proposed a bill to oust SEC chairman Gary Gensler and replace him with a new director. Whenever that will get approved by Congress is yet to be seen.
It would be a hugeq relief for both crypto exchanges and US customers if industry regulations eased off a bit without Gary Gensler. Maybe this will bring back exchanges that left the country because of strict regulations? Time is running out for the US, so it'd better act fast before other countries "eat its candies". Who knows what the future holds for crypto/Blockchain tech in the region? Just my thoughts
~
This is where the problem begins and you admit this yourself. Maximalists argue from a biased view of the cryptospace and consider everything in it has no right to try new things if it is not done in bitcoin. This is not reasonable and it does not allow space for innovation. No one knows what the cryptospace will be, similar to what no one knew what the internet might be when it was invented.
I am not against innovation, let's make this clear!
I'm not against projects like Wasabi or Bisq or Open bazaar or whatever, where I stop sympathizing with so-called "devs" is when they ask for money before having anything other than a plagiarized whitepaper. So my question stills stand, what kind of innovation other than ICO sales are the new regulation hindering? Because you see, bitcoin had no ICO, LN had no ICO, segwit had no ICO, and neither did a ton of things, if we go into the altcoin universe there is nothing without upfront money from investors, sometimes more money than Google would need
So until somebody shows me a real project that was a net benefit to the community and didn't require billion in purchased shitcoins that was forced to leave becuase of this I won't budge from my position, which is that they can all go to h*&^!
This is why I wish CZ will win and show decentralization works.
CZ and decentralization, this was actually funny!
Everything in bitcoin with no space for anything else because everthing that is not bitcoin is a scam, correct?
Also, yes CZ and the decentralization of the different cryptocoins, tokens, and the protocols in the cryptospace. This is not funny. I reckon this is an annoyance for the regulators hehehe. CZ holds billions in crypto, how can the government take it from him? How can the government stop him from moving them from address to address or convert them to Monero where it cannot be detected?
I really hope the US comes to its senses, in order to avoid behind left behind in the dust. Other countries are already way ahead of the game with their flexible crypto regulations. With Bittrex out of the scene, I wonder if Binance.US will be the next one to leave the country? 
To me personally, it all looks like preparation and cleaning space for accepting one or two government-friendly players.
However, if it is really true that Bittrex has been operating for years without the necessary registrations and licenses, they have to go. It is interesting that Bittrex has always insisted on very strict regulations, if I am not mistaken they were among the first to introduce mandatory KYC, all under the pretext of complying with regulations.
I really hope the US comes to its senses, in order to avoid behind left behind in the dust. Other countries are already way ahead of the game with their flexible crypto regulations. With Bittrex out of the scene, I wonder if Binance.US will be the next one to leave the country?
They have been struggling to find a new banking partner for some time now, and they also said they'll be limiting their investments in the U.S so I wouldn't be surprised if they do leave.
Coinbase's CEO also made a statement today, saying that relocating to somewhere else[1][2] is not off the table.
[1] https://blockworks.co/news/could-coinbase-leave-us
[2] https://www.coindesk.com/business/2023/04/18/coinbase-could-move-away-from-us-if-no-regulatory-clarity-ceo-brian-armstrong/
Yes, unfortunately we heard the bad news, Bittrex has been one of the oldest and best centralized exchanges for many years, it seems that the attack by the government of the United States of America will not leave anyone alone.
The CEO tweeted that due to regulatory uncertainty the exchange would cease operations in the US, but would not affect Bittrex Global.
Despite the unfortunate news, I see the news on a positive side, which is that in the end all these centralized exchanges and other services will migrate from the United States and its strict regulatory laws to countries that are more open to crypto, and this will be in the interest of crypto in the end.
The CEO tweeted that due to regulatory uncertainty the exchange would cease operations in the US, but would not affect Bittrex Global.
Despite the unfortunate news, I see the news on a positive side, which is that in the end all these centralized exchanges and other services will migrate from the United States and its strict regulatory laws to countries that are more open to crypto, and this will be in the interest of crypto in the end.
The ones that will be most affected are not exchanges, but rather, US customers themselves. If all CEXs move away from the country, there will be no way to trade cryptocurrencies using US Dollars, unless you do it in-person (which is risky, and difficult to find someone you can trust for this). DEXs won't be an option, because they don't provide Fiat on/off ramps. Those that do are not truly decentralized.
I really hope the US comes to its senses, in order to avoid behind left behind in the dust. Other countries are already way ahead of the game with their flexible crypto regulations. With Bittrex out of the scene, I wonder if Binance.US will be the next one to leave the country?
~
This is where the problem begins and you admit this yourself. Maximalists argue from a biased view of the cryptospace and consider everything in it has no right to try new things if it is not done in bitcoin. This is not reasonable and it does not allow space for innovation. No one knows what the cryptospace will be, similar to what no one knew what the internet might be when it was invented.
I am not against innovation, let's make this clear!
I'm not against projects like Wasabi or Bisq or Open bazaar or whatever, where I stop sympathizing with so-called "devs" is when they ask for money before having anything other than a plagiarized whitepaper. So my question stills stand, what kind of innovation other than ICO sales are the new regulation hindering? Because you see, bitcoin had no ICO, LN had no ICO, segwit had no ICO, and neither did a ton of things, if we go into the altcoin universe there is nothing without upfront money from investors, sometimes more money than Google would need
So until somebody shows me a real project that was a net benefit to the community and didn't require billion in purchased shitcoins that was forced to leave becuase of this I won't budge from my position, which is that they can all go to h*&^!
This is why I wish CZ will win and show decentralization works.
CZ and decentralization, this was actually funny!
I remember reading about it in some articles that Bittrex is on the verge of filing a case with the SEC. Thanks to the people who posted it here. I remember them as being one of the first exchanges, and I also have been with them for a time, but I don't get to trade with them anymore due to complications and trading fees.
I'm curious as to what are the things behind the exchange.
I'm curious as to what are the things behind the exchange.
I am of course heavily biased since I'm a bitcoin maximalist to the core but if it were from my point of view I would ban completely any coin offering or limit it to the value of the assets the company has at the moment of the launch. You have $1000 in assets that's how much you can get in from selling shitcoin, no stuff liKe getting 4 billion in funding and ending with...EOS?
Would you cry over them not being allowed to operate in your country? I wouldn't!
Would you cry over them not being allowed to operate in your country? I wouldn't!
This is where the problem begins and you admit this yourself. Maximalists argue from a biased view of the cryptospace and consider everything in it has no right to try new things if it is not done in bitcoin. This is not reasonable and it does not allow space for innovation. No one knows what the cryptospace will be, similar to what no one knew what the internet might be when it was invented.
In any case, a news update on the lawsuit against Bittrex. The SEC declares that Algorand, Dash, OMG Network and more in what was said to be a nonexhaustive list. This is head shaking because Bittrex risked growth of the exchange by following the rules when the SEC began issuing warnings on tokens issued as illegal securities. This is why I wish CZ will win and show decentralization works.
SEC Labels Algorand and Five Other Tokens as Securities in Bittrex Lawsuit
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) categorized six cryptocurrencies as securities in its lawsuit against crypto exchange Bittrex on Monday, highlighting them as potentially pivotal assets in an enforcement action against the Seattle-based firm.
The crux of the SEC’s complaint against Bittrex is that the platform failed to register with the watchdog as an exchange, broker-dealer, or clearing agency—a requirement for offering securities to customers in a manner regulated by the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.
Read in full https://decrypt.co/136990/sec-bittrex-lawsuit-algorand-five-tokens-securities
But there are seemingly older exchanges based in the US such as Coinbase, Kraken, Gemini etc that seem stable unlike this other ones that keep playing hide and seek with the regulators. Bittrex tried that hide and seek game and failed. I think they even had two branches if i recall well. I think I remember some of us being forced to use Bittrex Global for non US users.
Coinbase, apparently, has already regretted 100 times that all this time they have been actively trying to develop under American jurisdiction, they themselves are no longer happy about this. It is quite possible that if they had a different jurisdiction, they would have had much more influence in the crypto exchange market and would have bitten off a much larger piece of the exchange market pie. In 2023, they finally realized that this is hindering the development of their business and are thinking about changing jurisdiction to a friendlier one: Bloomberg learns of Coinbase’s plans to create an exchange outside of US jurisdiction
They can't do that because they are a publicly traded company so their stock would get hammered if they try to move their headquarters overseas.
Besides, doing that will throw most of their US customers under the bus.
Ok, what will the US miss in terms of innovation?
Care to share some examples of companies and innovative products that the US or the EU might miss because of regulations?
Care to share some examples of companies and innovative products that the US or the EU might miss because of regulations?
Bored apes, Pepes shaped like sports cars, teenage mutant mutant apes, cyberpunks in 256-bit colors (what is this, Windows 95?), crypto tigers (the product of cryptokitties growing up), and let's not forget Bitcoinnect 9000.0! /s
This just came out: https://decrypt.co/136947/bittrex-faces-potential-enforcement-action-sec-report
I'm not very familiar with the laws and regulations in the U.S but how can this make sense if they already announced shutting down their operations?
I'm not very familiar with the laws and regulations in the U.S but how can this make sense if they already announced shutting down their operations?
Juts as Rikafip said, it's about past actions.
And it's not just an US thing it's fairly common even for the EU and at least a few South Asian nations I'm familiar with, I've known case when the government will take to court for past action even companies that are no longer present in their jurisdiction or companies that have been bought, etc etc.
That's one of the reasons why international arbitration courts exist, you shutting down your US or Mongolian branch doesn't erase your past actions there.
The even "funnier" thing happens when you're getting an inquiry in your main branch country about practices by your subsidiaries in a foreign country despite following the rules there but breaching the standards here, one of the biggest pain in the ass ever, and unfortunately not so uncommon as one mgiht think.
I'm not very familiar with the laws and regulations in the U.S but how can this make sense if they already announced shutting down their operations?
Quote from: https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-78
The Securities and Exchange Commission today charged crypto asset trading platform Bittrex, Inc. and its co-founder and former CEO William Shihara for operating an unregistered national securities exchange, broker, and clearing agency. The SEC also charged Bittrex, Inc.’s foreign affiliate, Bittrex Global GmbH, for failing to register as a national securities exchange in connection with its operation of a single shared order book along with Bittrex.
From 2017 through 2022, Bittrex earned at least $1.3 billion in revenues from, among other things, transaction fees from investors, including U.S. investors, while servicing them as a broker, exchange, and clearing agency without registering any of these activities with the Commission.
From 2017 through 2022, Bittrex earned at least $1.3 billion in revenues from, among other things, transaction fees from investors, including U.S. investors, while servicing them as a broker, exchange, and clearing agency without registering any of these activities with the Commission.
This just came out: https://decrypt.co/136947/bittrex-faces-potential-enforcement-action-sec-report
I'm not very familiar with the laws and regulations in the U.S but how can this make sense if they already announced shutting down their operations?
I'm not very familiar with the laws and regulations in the U.S but how can this make sense if they already announced shutting down their operations?
I'm not sure how many U.S users they have, but by looking at the current trading volume[2] I wouldn't be surprised to see them shut down the entire platform before the end of the year.
I see that lately many crypto exchanges operating in Singapore do not comply with and are subject to the basic rule guidelines that have been set by the Singapore government as a regulator regarding financial protection for the public, especially in Singapore, but for now even though the Bittrex company wants to close operations in the US, in Singapore it has not had a negative impact, but concerns from Bittrex users themselves are in Singapore.One hand, if I see on Twitter Bittrex stopped operations in the US with reasons.
Quote
Due to continued regulatory uncertainty, we have taken the difficult decision to cease our operations in the US effective April 30, 2023. All funds are safe and fully withdrawn immediately,” Bittrex wrote via its Twitter account, quoted from Bitcoin.
Whereas in singapore the rules for crypto exchanges operating there are clear, ok, US is not clear, if Bittrex does the same in singapore it is a disaster for crypto users in singapore, I hope what happened to US society doesn't happen to Singapore but we don't know what will happen in future please stay safe.
I'm not talking about exchanges bringing innovation, but rather crypto startups and companies alike. Fierce regulations will only make them flee the country, taking away innovation with them.
And what fierce regulations would make normal start-ups flee the country?
The only ones that would be affected by these are those who come with some vaporware and buzzwords, try to get funding with some shitty token and then to end up bankrupt, no regulation will prevent somebody from coming up with a real product and a piece of software and follow the same path as hundreds and thousands of tech companies have done.
I am of course heavily biased since I'm a bitcoin maximalist to the core but if it were from my point of view I would ban completely any coin offering or limit it to the value of the assets the company has at the moment of the launch. You have $1000 in assets that's how much you can get in from selling shitcoin, no stuff liKe getting 4 billion in funding and ending with...EOS?
Would you cry over them not being allowed to operate in your country? I wouldn't!
Either way, things are not looking good for US as one of the leading countries in crypto/Blockchain tech innovation.
Ok, what will the US miss in terms of innovation?
Care to share some examples of companies and innovative products that the US or the EU might miss because of regulations?
Yes, unfortunately we heard the bad news, Bittrex has been one of the oldest and best centralized exchanges for many years, it seems that the attack by the government of the United States of America will not leave anyone alone.
The CEO tweeted that due to regulatory uncertainty the exchange would cease operations in the US, but would not affect Bittrex Global.
Despite the unfortunate news, I see the news on a positive side, which is that in the end all these centralized exchanges and other services will migrate from the United States and its strict regulatory laws to countries that are more open to crypto, and this will be in the interest of crypto in the end.
The CEO tweeted that due to regulatory uncertainty the exchange would cease operations in the US, but would not affect Bittrex Global.
Despite the unfortunate news, I see the news on a positive side, which is that in the end all these centralized exchanges and other services will migrate from the United States and its strict regulatory laws to countries that are more open to crypto, and this will be in the interest of crypto in the end.
Coinbase, apparently, has already regretted 100 times that all this time they have been actively trying to develop under American jurisdiction, they themselves are no longer happy about this. It is quite possible that if they had a different jurisdiction, they would have had much more influence in the crypto exchange market and would have bitten off a much larger piece of the exchange market pie. In 2023, they finally realized that this is hindering the development of their business and are thinking about changing jurisdiction to a friendlier one: Bloomberg learns of Coinbase’s plans to create an exchange outside of US jurisdiction
And yet they are blocking and suspending thousands of user accounts every other time for no good reason or explanation under the guise of the accounts "no longer meeting their updated standards of services"?Hard luck to them!
Crypto innovation?
What has Kraken or Binance innovated? One hundred types of trading and leverage and shitcoins in order to fleece you to the last penny in shitty deals and fees?
Binance's greatest innovation was having 7 shitcoins posing as Bitcoin over different chains.
Segwit is innovation, LN is innovation, Bisq is innovation, all the above crying in fear of losing their fees CEX are nothing like that, they are one huge step backward where the whole thing of denying a third party control is forgotten. There is nothing lost in advancement and in creating new stuff if all the CEX go bankrupt, they are the ones hurting innovation and they are the ones painting a fake narrative on cryptos, making them look more like easy money and ways to get rich than what they were supposed to do normally. No entity that works on the principle of taking your coins and not guaranteeing their return should even dare to talk about hindering crypto progress and decentralization, they are the ones keeping the entire environment in still a bank-like stage with centralized solutions in charge of your funds just like banks.
What has Kraken or Binance innovated? One hundred types of trading and leverage and shitcoins in order to fleece you to the last penny in shitty deals and fees?
Binance's greatest innovation was having 7 shitcoins posing as Bitcoin over different chains.
Segwit is innovation, LN is innovation, Bisq is innovation, all the above crying in fear of losing their fees CEX are nothing like that, they are one huge step backward where the whole thing of denying a third party control is forgotten. There is nothing lost in advancement and in creating new stuff if all the CEX go bankrupt, they are the ones hurting innovation and they are the ones painting a fake narrative on cryptos, making them look more like easy money and ways to get rich than what they were supposed to do normally. No entity that works on the principle of taking your coins and not guaranteeing their return should even dare to talk about hindering crypto progress and decentralization, they are the ones keeping the entire environment in still a bank-like stage with centralized solutions in charge of your funds just like banks.
I'm not talking about exchanges bringing innovation, but rather crypto startups and companies alike. Fierce regulations will only make them flee the country, taking away innovation with them. If we talk about exchanges, then I guess the only innovator would be Binance with its own blockchain network called "Binance Chain". But I don't think it can be called an "innovation", especially when it's an exact copy of ETH (except that the consensus mechanism is different).
Either way, things are not looking good for US as one of the leading countries in crypto/Blockchain tech innovation. The tigher regulations get, the more companies will "flock" to other countries. Bittrex wasn't that big of an exchange as FTX was, but its departure will certainly make a bad impact on the crypto market within the short term. Let's hope behemoths like Binance and Coinbase stay in the country for the healthy growth of this industry. Just my thoughts
Bittrex just announced a few minutes ago via Twitter[1] that they will no longer be offering their services to U.S customers and everyone should withdraw their funds before the 30th of April.
I'm not sure how many U.S users they have, but by looking at the current trading volume[2] I wouldn't be surprised to see them shut down the entire platform before the end of the year.
[1] https://twitter.com/BittrexExchange/status/1641879884682387457
[2] https://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/bittrex/
I'm not sure how many U.S users they have, but by looking at the current trading volume[2] I wouldn't be surprised to see them shut down the entire platform before the end of the year.
[1] https://twitter.com/BittrexExchange/status/1641879884682387457
[2] https://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/bittrex/
It is becoming clearer that the United States of America is becoming more cryptocurrency unfriendly these days than the early days of cryptocurrency.
I do not actually understand why it is happening. I also learnt that a serving senator or a presidential aspirant is passing a bill to also discredit cryptocurrency or bitcoin in one way or the other. What I really want to know is whether America is working for the good will of the people by not allowing manipulation by the exchanges or do they have a hidden agenda to frustrate the operation of cryptocurrency in the United States jurisdiction?
I guess this is the endgame for the US as one of the leading countries for crypto innovation. Bittrex will go away, but I believe others will follow suit (Binance, Coinbase, Kraken) unless US regulators become a little more flexible.
Crypto innovation?
What has Kraken or Binance innovated? One hundred types of trading and leverage and shitcoins in order to fleece you to the last penny in shitty deals and fees?
Binance's greatest innovation was having 7 shitcoins posing as Bitcoin over different chains.
Segwit is innovation, LN is innovation, Bisq is innovation, all the above crying in fear of losing their fees CEX are nothing like that, they are one huge step backward where the whole thing of denying a third party control is forgotten. There is nothing lost in advancement and in creating new stuff if all the CEX go bankrupt, they are the ones hurting innovation and they are the ones painting a fake narrative on cryptos, making them look more like easy money and ways to get rich than what they were supposed to do normally. No entity that works on the principle of taking your coins and not guaranteeing their return should even dare to talk about hindering crypto progress and decentralization, they are the ones keeping the entire environment in still a bank-like stage with centralized solutions in charge of your funds just like banks.
Reminds me how everyone criticized Japan how tight their regulations were, how Binance and then Kraken fled the country how it will hinder everything all that doom and gloom and when FTX crashed down, what a surprise:
Japan Was the Safest Place to Be an FTX Customer
So as a normal user that somehow still trusts CEX to be safe and to have access to your money at any time and not lost by some deranged individual trading between gangbangs with his roommates, what would you have:
- tightly regulated exchanges where one can't play with your coins or fiat
- laser eyes wild west with a ton of shitcoins and no guarantee somebody is leveraging your precious BTC against god knows what ponzi scheme
The moment you have already taken the risks of sending your coins to a third party, why would you want that 3rd party to have the liberty of doing whatever he wants with no consequences? I really don't get it, tighter regulations can only lead to two things
- end of CEXs, which is not a catastrophe anyhow since BTC was designed to work without them anyhow
- tighter controls and safer ones, for the ones that are still foolish enough to trust a 3rd party
Japan Was the Safest Place to Be an FTX Customer
So as a normal user that somehow still trusts CEX to be safe and to have access to your money at any time and not lost by some deranged individual trading between gangbangs with his roommates, what would you have:
- tightly regulated exchanges where one can't play with your coins or fiat
- laser eyes wild west with a ton of shitcoins and no guarantee somebody is leveraging your precious BTC against god knows what ponzi scheme
The moment you have already taken the risks of sending your coins to a third party, why would you want that 3rd party to have the liberty of doing whatever he wants with no consequences? I really don't get it, tighter regulations can only lead to two things
- end of CEXs, which is not a catastrophe anyhow since BTC was designed to work without them anyhow
- tighter controls and safer ones, for the ones that are still foolish enough to trust a 3rd party
Excess regulations will only do more harm than good to the industry in the long run. There needs to be a balance in order to protect both sides' interests (customers and companies). I guess this is the endgame for the US as one of the leading countries for crypto innovation. Bittrex will go away, but I believe others will follow suit (Binance, Coinbase, Kraken) unless US regulators become a little more flexible.
I think the SEC is being aggresive towards crypto after what happened with Terra/Luna and FTX exchange. It's trying to protect investors' interest, but it's also scaring away crypto exchanges. How will everything unfold in the long run, is a mystery. If people in the US can't trade crypto through centralized exchanges, they will be forced to look for other alternatives. The revolution simply can't be stopped. Let's hope the US government starts easing regulations for the good of the industry. Just my thoughts
What gets me is the 30 days to withdraw. Yes, if you monitor that email that you linked to the exchange it's fine.
But, I'm sure there are going to be a lot of people out there who have a minimal amount sitting there and will deal with it 'tomorrow' who will never see the shutdown email. And then in a couple of months when they go to finally move their .1 LTC or 100 Doge or whatever they have sitting there they are going to be pissed.
It's not like the entire exchange is going away. No reason just to stop allowing deposits and trades for US people.
-Dave
But, I'm sure there are going to be a lot of people out there who have a minimal amount sitting there and will deal with it 'tomorrow' who will never see the shutdown email. And then in a couple of months when they go to finally move their .1 LTC or 100 Doge or whatever they have sitting there they are going to be pissed.
It's not like the entire exchange is going away. No reason just to stop allowing deposits and trades for US people.
-Dave
Another US-based exchange closes its doors to US customers. It's sad, because this tells us how strict the US is in terms of regulating crypto compared to other countries. I've used Bittrex a lot for buying/selling altcoins in USD, especially when Coinbase gave me a lot of headaches in the past. But this decision to "close up shop", will force me to look elsewhere. I just hope other exchanges don't do the same (Kraken, Binance) or the US will be left behind in terms of crypto innovation and mainstream adoption.
Reminds me how everyone criticized Japan how tight their regulations were, how Binance and then Kraken fled the country how it will hinder everything all that doom and gloom and when FTX crashed down, what a surprise:
Japan Was the Safest Place to Be an FTX Customer
So as a normal user that somehow still trusts CEX to be safe and to have access to your money at any time and not lost by some deranged individual trading between gangbangs with his roommates, what would you have:
- tightly regulated exchanges where one can't play with your coins or fiat
- laser eyes wild west with a ton of shitcoins and no guarantee somebody is leveraging your precious BTC against god knows what ponzi scheme
The moment you have already taken the risks of sending your coins to a third party, why would you want that 3rd party to have the liberty of doing whatever he wants with no consequences? I really don't get it, tighter regulations can only lead to two things
- end of CEXs, which is not a catastrophe anyhow since BTC was designed to work without them anyhow
- tighter controls and safer ones, for the ones that are still foolish enough to trust a 3rd party
Bittrex just announced a few minutes ago via Twitter[1] that they will no longer be offering their services to U.S customers and everyone should withdraw their funds before the 30th of April.
I'm not sure how many U.S users they have, but by looking at the current trading volume[2] I wouldn't be surprised to see them shut down the entire platform before the end of the year.
[1] https://twitter.com/BittrexExchange/status/1641879884682387457
[2] https://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/bittrex/
I'm not sure how many U.S users they have, but by looking at the current trading volume[2] I wouldn't be surprised to see them shut down the entire platform before the end of the year.
[1] https://twitter.com/BittrexExchange/status/1641879884682387457
[2] https://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/bittrex/
Another US-based exchange closes its doors to US customers. It's sad, because this tells us how strict the US is in terms of regulating crypto compared to other countries. I've used Bittrex a lot for buying/selling altcoins in USD, especially when Coinbase gave me a lot of headaches in the past. But this decision to "close up shop", will force me to look elsewhere. I just hope other exchanges don't do the same (Kraken, Binance) or the US will be left behind in terms of crypto innovation and mainstream adoption.
I'd say this is all the CFTC and SEC's fault (especially the SEC). They've went too far by exceeding their authority. The SEC is now classifying every crypto as a security (except BTC), taking strict measures against crypto exchanges that provide services of unregistered securities. It's all a mess that will ultimately lead into a mass exodus of crypto companies and startups into the EU and other crypto-friendly regions of the world. Who knows what impact this will have in market prices during the short-term? Just my opinion
I wouldn't be surprised to see them shut down the entire platform before the end of the year.
I won't be surprised as well but this gives me a lot of memories during their glory days. They've been so popular before but seems they lacked of adopting the trends that has came to the market.While US is becoming stricter with the implementation of their rules against these exchanges. They're just choosing what's best for them and that's to step out of the US market since it's still possible for their users to access their global brand.
That's why I don't wonder anymore if there are exchanges like this that shuts their US branches because even Binance have been struggling on that region.
I will not be surprised that this is only the beginning, and almost all American branches of well-known exchanges will cease to exist in the foreseeable future. Or even the exchanges that exist in American jurisdiction will completely change this very jurisdiction to a more friendly one for doing crypto business and will not be subject to constant attacks from regulators. Although, this can greatly untie the hands of such exchanges and they will start playing dirty games. Still, American exchanges did not use such a popular manipulation as trading volume cheating, judging by the latest reports among all major exchanges.
But there are seemingly older exchanges based in the US such as Coinbase, Kraken, Gemini etc that seem stable unlike this other ones that keep playing hide and seek with the regulators. Bittrex tried that hide and seek game and failed. I think they even had two branches if i recall well. I think I remember some of us being forced to use Bittrex Global for non US users.The manipulation rumors, insider trading and troubles with SEC keep popping up from time to time even with Coinbase, Gemini but I believe they try to follow the rules to the book as compared to crypto exchanges that are not based in the US.
Its sad to see what became of Bittrex as if I remember correctly they were one of the leading exchanges back in early 2017 when I rejoined the crypto so naturally I used it too. If I am not mistaken, I think they even had a practice of delisting shitcoins if they weren't following their roadmap which is something I would like to see again.
I This force me to submit again KYC using my valid ID which is odd since Binance and other exchange doesn’t ask me for this KYC update.
I guess you were lucky so far because Binance also has a habit of annoying their customers with repeated KYC. 
Bittrex died for me the day they made KYC mandatory and now they are losing their US operations... It is not a big surprise. They should have kept thier operations off-shore, accepted no U.S. customers and maybe then they would still be relevant today. It is just
nearly impossible to do any business with the US government. Iran, China, Russia already stopped it and now even their old partner Saudi's are leaving the US Dollar... The US needs to get its shit together asap.
nearly impossible to do any business with the US government. Iran, China, Russia already stopped it and now even their old partner Saudi's are leaving the US Dollar... The US needs to get its shit together asap.
I completely forgot about this exchange. If I remember correctly, I already completed KYC there and used it very actively at one time. now they are asking me to go through KYC verification again, what could be the reason for that, I guess they didn't lose the previous information.
it's a good thing that I didn't leave any of my funds there.
it's a good thing that I didn't leave any of my funds there.
I question this same issue on their support and they told me that this for updating my records on the exchange since my ID that I submitted is no longer valid by the time I use the exchange.
I left some Dogecoins in there few years ago that already grows the value. This force me to submit again KYC using my valid ID which is odd since Binance and other exchange doesn’t ask me for this KYC update.
Lol
How times change.
I remember back in the day, 2016-2017-ish, before the emergency of Binance, Bittrex was top exchange. Any token or shitcoin that was rumored to get listed or was actually announced to be listed on bittrex would pump so hard.
But then they started restricting users by asking them to first do mandatory KYC verification. That was the beginning of their fall. I personally don't really care if they completely shut down.
How times change.
I remember back in the day, 2016-2017-ish, before the emergency of Binance, Bittrex was top exchange. Any token or shitcoin that was rumored to get listed or was actually announced to be listed on bittrex would pump so hard.
But then they started restricting users by asking them to first do mandatory KYC verification. That was the beginning of their fall. I personally don't really care if they completely shut down.
Agreed. They would have become the giant of the cryptospace if they used similar tactics and strategies as CZ has used on how to avoid unclear rules and regulations around different jurisdictions hehe.
I used to be a regular user of Bittrex. I never had any problems with the exchange. I am not quite certain why there are some people in who say that it is a scam.
Those were the days, the good ol' days!
I was also a big fan of Bittrex back then. Bittrex was the top, the number 1. It was my exchange when I started learning about Bitcoin and trading. I never had a problem with them.
Being admitted there used to be the ultimate dream of new coins. Bittrex listing carried some sort of assurance and guarantee. And it almost always meant a pump.
Binance's arrival in the scene was very timely. It was around the time when Bittrex started to implement mandatory KYC. Binance offered what Bittrex deprived CEx users of. Unfortunately, years passed and Binance ended up implementing the same.
Lol
How times change.
I remember back in the day, 2016-2017-ish, before the emergency of Binance, Bittrex was top exchange. Any token or shitcoin that was rumored to get listed or was actually announced to be listed on bittrex would pump so hard.
But then they started restricting users by asking them to first do mandatory KYC verification. That was the beginning of their fall. I personally don't really care if they completely shut down.
How times change.
I remember back in the day, 2016-2017-ish, before the emergency of Binance, Bittrex was top exchange. Any token or shitcoin that was rumored to get listed or was actually announced to be listed on bittrex would pump so hard.
But then they started restricting users by asking them to first do mandatory KYC verification. That was the beginning of their fall. I personally don't really care if they completely shut down.
Agreed. They would have become the giant of the cryptospace if they used similar tactics and strategies as CZ has used on how to avoid unclear rules and regulations around different jurisdictions hehe.
I used to be a regular user of Bittrex. I never had any problems with the exchange. I am not quite certain why there are some people in who say that it is a scam.
Is this platform still operating at all? I remember that it was one of the best platforms on the market and supports many currencies at the time. After the ICO wave since 2018, I have not heard anything about it, and even my account on that platform, I gave up its use after they asked me to prove my identity via Kyc. I also remember that it had passed a period of difficulties, as the complaints abounded in it, and the platform stopped producing advertising campaigns. Given the size of its daily transactions, I find it surprising that the platform still has customers who escaped from Binance and the rest of the market giants.
As for American users, it is certain that no one wants to deal with them from the beginning due to the severe control imposed by their governments, whether directly on them or on the platforms they use. Moreover, it is not possible to ensure that the decision was taken independently from the platform or the result of any pressure.
As for American users, it is certain that no one wants to deal with them from the beginning due to the severe control imposed by their governments, whether directly on them or on the platforms they use. Moreover, it is not possible to ensure that the decision was taken independently from the platform or the result of any pressure.
Lol
How times change.
I remember back in the day, 2016-2017-ish, before the emergency of Binance, Bittrex was top exchange. Any token or shitcoin that was rumored to get listed or was actually announced to be listed on bittrex would pump so hard.
But then they started restricting users by asking them to first do mandatory KYC verification. That was the beginning of their fall. I personally don't really care if they completely shut down.
How times change.
I remember back in the day, 2016-2017-ish, before the emergency of Binance, Bittrex was top exchange. Any token or shitcoin that was rumored to get listed or was actually announced to be listed on bittrex would pump so hard.
But then they started restricting users by asking them to first do mandatory KYC verification. That was the beginning of their fall. I personally don't really care if they completely shut down.
Bittrex just announced a few minutes ago via Twitter[1] that they will no longer be offering their services to U.S customers and everyone should withdraw their funds before the 30th of April.
Isn't this a short period to withdraw money? Approximately there are only 30 days, on average the platforms give 90 days, which means that the matter is a judicial settlement or under pressure from the US authorities.When will they decide to stop? Almost all crypto platforms have been affected by decisions from the United States in one way or another.
I completely forgot about this exchange. If I remember correctly, I already completed KYC there and used it very actively at one time. now they are asking me to go through KYC verification again, what could be the reason for that, I guess they didn't lose the previous information.
it's a good thing that I didn't leave any of my funds there.
$11 million/24h trading volume is not so bad for a small exchange, as far as I remember, their biggest problem is a very conservative way of doing business and poor adaptation to new things.
it's a good thing that I didn't leave any of my funds there.
I'm not sure how many U.S users they have, but by looking at the current trading volume[2] I wouldn't be surprised to see them shut down the entire platform before the end of the year.
$11 million/24h trading volume is not so bad for a small exchange, as far as I remember, their biggest problem is a very conservative way of doing business and poor adaptation to new things.
Bittrex just announced a few minutes ago via Twitter[1] that they will no longer be offering their services to U.S customers and everyone should withdraw their funds before the 30th of April.
I'm not sure how many U.S users they have, but by looking at the current trading volume[2] I wouldn't be surprised to see them shut down the entire platform before the end of the year.
[1] https://twitter.com/BittrexExchange/status/1641879884682387457
[2] https://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/bittrex/
I'm not sure how many U.S users they have, but by looking at the current trading volume[2] I wouldn't be surprised to see them shut down the entire platform before the end of the year.
[1] https://twitter.com/BittrexExchange/status/1641879884682387457
[2] https://coinmarketcap.com/exchanges/bittrex/
Jump to: