https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/02/09/stablecoin-issuer-paxos-is-being-investigated-by-new-york-regulator/
Stablecoin Issuer Paxos Is Being Investigated by New York Regulator
"The scope of the crypto-related investigation is not yet clear.
The full scope of the investigation is unclear. Paxos’ stablecoins include the Pax dollar (USDP) and Binance USD (BUSD), a Binance-branded stablecoin offered through a white-label service.
A NYDFS spokesperson said the agency could not comment on ongoing investigations."
__
Topic: More Regulation Incoming! - page 6. (Read 1753 times)
Cryptocurrency and the evolution of blockchain technology is a real visible revolution in trading and worldwide monetary exchange. One key ruling by the SEC was that they decided that a Token represents a security by the company that issued that token.
https://www.theblock.co/post/197387/ftx-ftt-token-security-sec
This is wrong, and I truly hope that there a many lawyers around the globe fighting this rule by the SEC.
Example: Mattel makes dolls, and sells dolls, just like FTX made FTT tokens and sold them. But, just because investors by large quantities of some product does not make that company indebted to those buyers. If Mattel were to file bankruptcy like FTX, then Mattel would not owe any debt to all the investors who bought those dolls. Therefore, I believe that the SEC is truly wrong about calling any cryptocurrency a security. It is more like a commodity. Especially when many cryptocurrencies are decentralized, and there is no central company that controls their price or supply. That may not be true across all blockchain tokens, but my opinion is that the SEC is not the ruler of the world of finance, and the cryptocurrency business lawyers need to revolt and sue the SEC against their security ruling and forthcoming regulation. The SEC should stick to chasing down bad actors like SBF, Bernie Madoff, ENRON, etc. The flim-flam con-men who would use legitimate blockchain tokens for nefarious purposes.
https://www.theblock.co/post/197387/ftx-ftt-token-security-sec
This is wrong, and I truly hope that there a many lawyers around the globe fighting this rule by the SEC.
Example: Mattel makes dolls, and sells dolls, just like FTX made FTT tokens and sold them. But, just because investors by large quantities of some product does not make that company indebted to those buyers. If Mattel were to file bankruptcy like FTX, then Mattel would not owe any debt to all the investors who bought those dolls. Therefore, I believe that the SEC is truly wrong about calling any cryptocurrency a security. It is more like a commodity. Especially when many cryptocurrencies are decentralized, and there is no central company that controls their price or supply. That may not be true across all blockchain tokens, but my opinion is that the SEC is not the ruler of the world of finance, and the cryptocurrency business lawyers need to revolt and sue the SEC against their security ruling and forthcoming regulation. The SEC should stick to chasing down bad actors like SBF, Bernie Madoff, ENRON, etc. The flim-flam con-men who would use legitimate blockchain tokens for nefarious purposes.
This is delusional, Mattel dolls are not some speculative floating point number on an excell spreadsheet being scanned by some horribly written python code. Im not some Mattel fan but the business model of selling Toys or Dolls actually provides some value to children, selling some paper shitcoin that left a ton of people holding -100% in their portfolio is not a product. You should sit in the corner and really think about what delusional bullshit you just typed out.
https://coinmarketcap.com/alexandria/article/kraken-faces-sec-probe-over-unregistered-securities-sales
The Kraken exchange may be next on the Securities and Exchange Commission's hit list.
Kraken is being probed by the agency for selling unregistered securities to U.S. citizens, Bloomberg reported on Feb. 8. A settlement may be coming in days, it added.
The SEC has long held that nearly all cryptocurrencies except Bitcoin are securities that must be registered with the agency and sold by registered broker-dealers.
The Kraken exchange may be next on the Securities and Exchange Commission's hit list.
Kraken is being probed by the agency for selling unregistered securities to U.S. citizens, Bloomberg reported on Feb. 8. A settlement may be coming in days, it added.
The SEC has long held that nearly all cryptocurrencies except Bitcoin are securities that must be registered with the agency and sold by registered broker-dealers.
More regulatory bodies are trying to fight over which of them will supposedly regulate crypto. Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) was once also in one article on a crypto site demanding regulation in which crypto could also be their domain.
SEC, FSOC, and CFTC have to make it clearer which of them is really going to regulate crypto. I guess all of them have thier own grand plan to have a grip on this industry, they got to take taxes. The problem is that crypto is borderless and US doesn't own the biggest CEX.
https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/02/03/us-cftc-chief-promises-more-precedent-setting-crypto-enforcement-cases/
US CFTC Chief Promises More ‘Precedent-Setting’ Crypto Enforcement Cases
Commission Chairman Behnam says his agency is gearing up for another year of significant actions in the crypto industry as he tries to ramp up his enforcement staff.
One of the U.S. agencies trying to bolster oversight of cryptocurrency trading, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), is looking toward a big year of crypto enforcement actions, according to Chairman Rostin Behnam.
US CFTC Chief Promises More ‘Precedent-Setting’ Crypto Enforcement Cases
Commission Chairman Behnam says his agency is gearing up for another year of significant actions in the crypto industry as he tries to ramp up his enforcement staff.
One of the U.S. agencies trying to bolster oversight of cryptocurrency trading, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), is looking toward a big year of crypto enforcement actions, according to Chairman Rostin Behnam.
While I agree that the SEC wants to enforce the Securities Act of 1933, they don't need to make a blanket statement that all cryptocurrencies should be treated as securities. There are some tokens currently considered commodities, which places their regulation under a different regulatory agency. Sure there will many con-men and scammers taking part in this blockchain alt-currency revolution, and the SEC and CFTC bureaucracies feel obligated to protect investors from such activity. But rather than trying to fit a square peg into a round hole, I would prefer to see them create some type of amendment to their existing regulations that would accommodate the uniqueness of blockchain tokens separately from stocks, bonds, and debt instruments sold by corporations. In the mean time, I'll just wait and watch on the sidelines and hope that the highly paid legal authorities battle out some type of enforceable regulation without damaging the current successful blockchain technology.
https://www.whitehouse.gov/nec/briefing-room/2023/01/27/the-administrations-roadmap-to-mitigate-cryptocurrencies-risks/
The Administration’s Roadmap to Mitigate Cryptocurrencies’ Risks
"The Administration wholeheartedly supports responsible technological innovations that make financial services cheaper, faster, safer, and more accessible. Yet to realize these benefits, new technologies need commensurate safeguards.. bla..bla.."
Request for Information; Digital Assets Research and Development
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/01/26/2023-01534/request-for-information-digital-assets-research-and-development
The Administration’s Roadmap to Mitigate Cryptocurrencies’ Risks
"The Administration wholeheartedly supports responsible technological innovations that make financial services cheaper, faster, safer, and more accessible. Yet to realize these benefits, new technologies need commensurate safeguards.. bla..bla.."
Request for Information; Digital Assets Research and Development
https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/01/26/2023-01534/request-for-information-digital-assets-research-and-development
https://www.theblock.co/post/197387/ftx-ftt-token-security-sec
This is wrong, and I truly hope that there a many lawyers around the globe fighting this rule by the SEC.
Example: Mattel makes dolls, and sells dolls, just like FTX made FTT tokens and sold them. But, just because investors by large quantities of some product does not make that company indebted to those buyers. If Mattel were to file bankruptcy like FTX, then Mattel would not owe any debt to all the investors who bought those dolls. Therefore, I believe that the SEC is truly wrong about calling any cryptocurrency a security.
This is wrong, and I truly hope that there a many lawyers around the globe fighting this rule by the SEC.
Example: Mattel makes dolls, and sells dolls, just like FTX made FTT tokens and sold them. But, just because investors by large quantities of some product does not make that company indebted to those buyers. If Mattel were to file bankruptcy like FTX, then Mattel would not owe any debt to all the investors who bought those dolls. Therefore, I believe that the SEC is truly wrong about calling any cryptocurrency a security.
Did Mattel make half a billion dollars for the company itself and used to play with them in exchange for services and used them to take loans and guarantee loans on other assets? Did Mattel at any time claim that these dolls are going to use to "improve and power the Mattel ecosystem? Did Mattel offer you any kind of interest on the dolls you would purchase and then send them back to their depo for a period of time, in a signed contract? Did Mattel promise they will buy back a few of the dolls and throw them in a dump so that the price of the other dolls would increase over time?
It is more like a commodity. Especially when many cryptocurrencies are decentralized, and there is no central company that controls their price or supply.
Yeah lol, just because it doesn't happen that offer, can you please tell me who stops CZ from releasing more BNB? Oh, wait, nobody has stopped him! Or you tell me of a few top cryptocurrencies besides Bitcoin that are fully decentralized and there is no one governing and ruling on a whim, well, like ETH? Or BNB? Or XRP? Or Terra, lol!!!
Cryptocurrency and the evolution of blockchain technology is a real visible revolution in trading and worldwide monetary exchange. One key ruling by the SEC was that they decided that a Token represents a security by the company that issued that token.
https://www.theblock.co/post/197387/ftx-ftt-token-security-sec
This is wrong, and I truly hope that there a many lawyers around the globe fighting this rule by the SEC.
Example: Mattel makes dolls, and sells dolls, just like FTX made FTT tokens and sold them. But, just because investors by large quantities of some product does not make that company indebted to those buyers. If Mattel were to file bankruptcy like FTX, then Mattel would not owe any debt to all the investors who bought those dolls. Therefore, I believe that the SEC is truly wrong about calling any cryptocurrency a security. It is more like a commodity. Especially when many cryptocurrencies are decentralized, and there is no central company that controls their price or supply. That may not be true across all blockchain tokens, but my opinion is that the SEC is not the ruler of the world of finance, and the cryptocurrency business lawyers need to revolt and sue the SEC against their security ruling and forthcoming regulation. The SEC should stick to chasing down bad actors like SBF, Bernie Madoff, ENRON, etc. The flim-flam con-men who would use legitimate blockchain tokens for nefarious purposes.
https://www.theblock.co/post/197387/ftx-ftt-token-security-sec
This is wrong, and I truly hope that there a many lawyers around the globe fighting this rule by the SEC.
Example: Mattel makes dolls, and sells dolls, just like FTX made FTT tokens and sold them. But, just because investors by large quantities of some product does not make that company indebted to those buyers. If Mattel were to file bankruptcy like FTX, then Mattel would not owe any debt to all the investors who bought those dolls. Therefore, I believe that the SEC is truly wrong about calling any cryptocurrency a security. It is more like a commodity. Especially when many cryptocurrencies are decentralized, and there is no central company that controls their price or supply. That may not be true across all blockchain tokens, but my opinion is that the SEC is not the ruler of the world of finance, and the cryptocurrency business lawyers need to revolt and sue the SEC against their security ruling and forthcoming regulation. The SEC should stick to chasing down bad actors like SBF, Bernie Madoff, ENRON, etc. The flim-flam con-men who would use legitimate blockchain tokens for nefarious purposes.
So, we will see new regulations coming in through the following months. Usually, regulation comes at a price and is more damaging than the other way around. I just hope that it isn't regulation that could stifle innovation and slow down the industry to a freezing point.
I think what should be more important is the punishment for scammers and not just the legislation for what they should do but how it must be mandatorily retrieve the money of investors. The FTX exchange scam is one too many that investors lost huge money that is not traceable or gotten back. Regulation is good but it has to be strong enough to punish scammers.
After what we saw last year it was expected. I don't know if it will be bad like many think it's going to be, from the adoption point of view. I think it actually can have a very positive impact, because investors are looking for guarantees and safety when investing their money. If they see cases like FTX and Celsius without the industry addressing the issues and preventing it from happening again futurely, of course they will stay away from crypto market. But if they see regulations are coming to prevent new scams from happening, I believe it's very likely they will start investing again. Anyway, since regulations are a double edge sword, it's necessary to follow closely how they are being introduced, who is going to be benefited and what are their consequences for real.
I don't like regulations, not only about privacy, but I fear that regulations will slow down the growth of the market. I believe most people enter the market because they like the volatility of cryptocurrencies, but once there is regulation, I fear that will disappear along with our privacy. Look at the stock market or the forex market, they are regulated, and they become more stable because they are tightly managed. Regulations are inevitable, but we can only hope they won't be too strict with us.
Regulation has nothing to do with a decentralized platform, it could be applicable on the centralized platforms if this is your choice. Might you forget the goal of the Bitcoin creator the reason why Bitcoin was created? What we can do now is to avoid centralized platforms to avoid more regulations.
Events like MTGOX and FTX are only damaging the Cryptocurrency Industry. Unfortunately, this sort of event is nothing new to the industry as every day we see crypto businesses going bankrupt and new scams coming in.
The recent FTX event motivated the US United States Financial Stability Oversight Council or FSOC is now recommending legislators study new regulations for cryptos.
So, we will see new regulations coming in through the following months. Usually, regulation comes at a price and is more damaging than the other way around. I just hope that it isn't regulation that could stifle innovation and slow down the industry to a freezing point.
The recent FTX event motivated the US United States Financial Stability Oversight Council or FSOC is now recommending legislators study new regulations for cryptos.
So, we will see new regulations coming in through the following months. Usually, regulation comes at a price and is more damaging than the other way around. I just hope that it isn't regulation that could stifle innovation and slow down the industry to a freezing point.
Unfortunately, the collapse of FTX and other centralized platforms have given an excuse to the regulators to enforce strict regulations in crypto industry. Now the regulators have an example of FTX that people money is being stolen and they should implement strict laws against crypto currencies.
There are centralized platforms whom motive is to earn money and they never care the growth of the crypto market.
Events like MTGOX and FTX are only damaging the Cryptocurrency Industry.
The actual damage is done by the media because they are the one who portrays in that way and its caused by ignorance of the individuals so how can be the cryptocurrency responsible for that. Stock market too have lot of restrictions but still many companies robbed their investors either directly or indirectly so regulations can't really stop the scam unless the investors get enough knowledge about what to do and not to do.
The FTX incident will certainly bring more stringent regulations against Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, but there is also something positive in favor of protecting users from similar incidents.
For example, the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies agreed to pass a law to legalize cryptocurrency as a means of payment, and the FTX collapse incident was taken into account and a clause was made in the law requiring exchanges to clearly distinguish between company funds and users:
In my opinion, distinguishing between company assets and user assets is an important development in favor of protecting users from similar incidents in the future.
For example, the Brazilian Chamber of Deputies agreed to pass a law to legalize cryptocurrency as a means of payment, and the FTX collapse incident was taken into account and a clause was made in the law requiring exchanges to clearly distinguish between company funds and users:
Quote
Apart from designating crypto as a payment method, the law enables the creation of licenses for crypto exchange platforms and for custody and management of crypto by third parties. In addition to this, the law will require exchanges to make a clear distinction between company and user funds, to avoid another incident like the FTX collapse.
https://cointelegraph.com/news/brazil-passes-law-to-legalize-crypto-as-a-payment-methodIn my opinion, distinguishing between company assets and user assets is an important development in favor of protecting users from similar incidents in the future.
Imho, Having more regulation is good rather than allowing big time scum bag freely steal people money using his shitcoin to rigged the DeFi scam scheme. People like Justin Sun will just keep stealing money if SEC didn't step in.
I believe there are lot of big people doing scam scheme like this freely since there is no regulators that protect consumers from this scheme. Poor TRX holders.
Quote from: https://twitter.com/jconorgrogan/status/1607038286824083456?s=21&t=G99-RP3GeJbs3PK7AhTclA
Justin Sun must have been a nice boy this year. 🎅 delivered some big presents
1: H.E Borrowed 200M USDT from JustLend which he later collateralized via TRX
2. Sent 200M USDT to Binance
3. Chain swapped to ETH and withdrew
4. Swapped to USDC on 1inch
5. Cashed out 100m USD
1: H.E Borrowed 200M USDT from JustLend which he later collateralized via TRX
2. Sent 200M USDT to Binance
3. Chain swapped to ETH and withdrew
4. Swapped to USDC on 1inch
5. Cashed out 100m USD
I believe there are lot of big people doing scam scheme like this freely since there is no regulators that protect consumers from this scheme. Poor TRX holders.
https://www.financemagnates.com/cryptocurrency/sec-charges-thor-token-creators-for-26m-ico/
SEC Charges Thor Token Creators for $2.6m ICO
"Moravec has heard similar charges but has already decided to settle. Under the settlement, he cannot engage in cryptocurrency activities for three years, must pay a fine of $95,000 and disgorge $407,103 plus prejudgment interest of $72,209.45."
The SEC knows how to have fun, how many more projects will be punished?
SEC Charges Thor Token Creators for $2.6m ICO
"Moravec has heard similar charges but has already decided to settle. Under the settlement, he cannot engage in cryptocurrency activities for three years, must pay a fine of $95,000 and disgorge $407,103 plus prejudgment interest of $72,209.45."
The SEC knows how to have fun, how many more projects will be punished?
I just hope that it isn't regulation that could stifle innovation and slow down the industry to a freezing point.
Oh buddy would they love witnessing that.-----
I think that regulations can be either good or bad, depending on various factors. On one hand, they can help build trust and confidence in the community. On the other hand, those who have been involved in the cryptocurrency industry for a while may not feel the need for regulations, as they have gained experience and are aware of many scams. However, regulations can also help protect newcomers from fraud and financial losses due to scams.
I am convinced they are not clustering up regulations to prevent you from becoming a victim. Because then regulations would sound different. They are afraid of things they can not control. Such as Bitcoin and your actions if you have Privacy.To me, only reason regulations are good is that businesses can get through the regulatory stuff easier and do not sit in a gray area of the market any more. Other than that, to us as customers and regular citizens there is nothing to win.
-
Regards,
PrivacyG
So, we will see new regulations coming in through the following months. Usually, regulation comes at a price and is more damaging than the other way around. I just hope that it isn't regulation that could stifle innovation and slow down the industry to a freezing point.
I'm all for low taxes and minimal regulations but I'm going to play devil's advocate in this case. In general when a successful industry is born, as cryptocurrencies would be in this case, the absence of regulations helps the business flourish. Not paying taxes, either because it is not foreseen in the legislation or because it is easy to escape them and the industry players do not pay them, also help the initial growth, as much more can be reinvested in the business.
But as the industries mature, some regulations become necessary so that it doesn't look like the Wild West and fraudsters run wild.
I would like regulations in which people who play an important role within the bitcoin ecosystem would be involved, which is not going to happen, as they will be made by politicians seeking to preserve their status quo, even though they may seek industry input to save face.
I don't like regulations, not only about privacy, but I fear that regulations will slow down the growth of the market. I believe most people enter the market because they like the volatility of cryptocurrencies, but once there is regulation, I fear that will disappear along with our privacy. Look at the stock market or the forex market, they are regulated, and they become more stable because they are tightly managed. Regulations are inevitable, but we can only hope they won't be too strict with us.
I think that regulations can be either good or bad, depending on various factors. On one hand, they can help build trust and confidence in the community. On the other hand, those who have been involved in the cryptocurrency industry for a while may not feel the need for regulations, as they have gained experience and are aware of many scams. However, regulations can also help protect newcomers from fraud and financial losses due to scams.
Jump to: