Binance.US said it can no longer accept USD deposits as of June 9 and will soon delist USD-based trading pairs, citing pressures from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The U.S.-based unit of the global crypto exchange described the move as a temporary transition to being “an all-crypto exchange.” Meanwhile, Robinhood, the popular trading platform that said recently it tried and failed to register as a digital asset broker with the SEC, is ending support for several tokens named as securities in the SEC lawsuits against Coinbase and Binance. Cardano (ADA), Polygon (MATIC) and Solana (SOL) trading will cease on June 27. For what it’s worth, Cardano development company IOG has argued the blockchain’s native token ada (ADA) is not a security, as has Solana Labs. Meanwhile, in a win for anyone who thinks “ETH is money,” scaling solution Optimism says ether (ETH) can now be used as a “native” token alongside the OP token on the platform.
Criminal Complaints
The U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ) charged Russian nationals Alexey Bilyuchenko and Aleksandr Verner with the 2014 Mt. Gox hack, one of the most influential attacks in crypto history. The DOJ also unsealed a 2016 filing focused on BTC-e, a shuttered exchange allegedly operated by Alexander Vinnick, who the agency says was connected to the Mt. Gox exploit. In total, 647,000 BTC were stolen and laundered over the course of nearly three years – with at least $6.6 million in funds passing through an unnamed New York-based bitcoin brokerage service. Separately, three U.S. venture capital firms ParaFi Capital, Framework Ventures and 1kx have sued Curve Finance CEO Michael Egorov for allegedly misappropriating trade secrets from the firms and defrauding them of nearly $1 million. Curve Finance is one of the largest Ethereum-based decentralized exchanges, with some $4.07 billion in total locked value. Egorov’s lawyers have denied the allegations.
Rulemaking Wins
The Republican chair of the House Financial Services Committee Patrick McHenry has released a new draft of the leading U.S. stablecoin oversight legislation, which will be discussed at a June 13 committee hearing. The bill, which includes input from Democratic lawmakers after complaints they were cut out from negotiations, represents a potential bipartisan advancement towards meaningful crypto regulation. The bill calls for the Fed to write requirements for issuing stablecoins but would let state regulators oversee the companies issuing the tokens. Meanwhile, the EU Parliament finally approved the much-awaited MiCA regulations, by publishing the crypto licensing and disclosure rules in the Official Journal of the European Union (OJEU) on Friday, starting the clock for the regulatory regime to take effect in 2024.
From privacy to regulation to governance to self-custody, an exploration of vital challenges facing the crypto community based on intimate, curated conversations held at Consensus 2023.
Consensus 2023 participants explored how user-focused design, cultural understanding, and gradual decentralization can drive mainstream crypto adoption
Consensus 2023 visitors discussed DeFi’s growth, its need to comply with regulations, and the challenges of balancing crypto-native concepts with traditional finance requirements.
The Takeaway: SEC Violations
When Gary Gensler’s Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) this week filed securities charges against America’s biggest cryptocurrency exchange, they were premised on a single core idea: that U.S. law already includes the necessary tools to regulate cryptocurrency assets and marketplaces. Gensler, an appointee of the Biden administration, has consistently repeated that crypto doesn’t need new rules.
But legislators from both the House and Senate, and belonging to both political parties, seem to disagree. A series of recent bills show the legislative branch actively engaged in lawmaking around crypto – they clearly don’t agree that the status quo is good enough. According to one legal theory based on a law known as the Administrative Procedures Act (APA), the existence of this process could undermine the SEC’s current round of enforcement actions, particularly the case against Coinbase.
On June 2, just days before the SEC actions, House Financial Services Chair Patrick McHenry (R-NC) and Agriculture Committee Chair Glenn Thomspon (R-PA) released a collaborative draft bill called the Digital Asset Market Structure and Investor Protection Act. The bill has some truly excellent provisions, including a safe harbor for non-security cryptos under $75 million market cap, and for limited sales to non-accredited investors. It also aims to clarify registration procedures for crypto exchanges, and even includes a plan for “progressive decentralization” that would allow assets to transition from security to commodity status over time.
These specifics are bad for the SEC’s case against Coinbase, since they address many of the precise issues the SEC claims the law already covers. But the bill’s very existence may be an even bigger problem for Gensler than its details, both legally and in the court of public opinion. The bill demonstrates an ongoing process of crypto market legislation, creating at least the appearance that Gensler is trying an end-run around Congress.
Though the House bill is largely a Republican effort, Senator Cyntha Lummis (R-WY) told The Block that she and Senator Kristen Gillibrand (D-NY) are holding the reintroduction of their own crypto regulation bill to see how things go in the House. So it’s not a huge stretch to say that Gary Gensler’s SEC is attempting to sneak past a bipartisan process unfolding across the House and Senate. (The fact that neither version is likely to pass under a Biden administration doesn’t change that.)
This could rise to the level of violating a 1946 law called the Administrative Procedures Act. The APA was crafted, over more than a decade, in an attempt to reconcile the growing administrative state with democratic principles. President Franklin Roosevelt warned at the time that the growth of bureaucratic U.S. agencies “threatens to develop a fourth branch of government for which there is no sanction in the Constitution.” Broadly, the goal of the APA is to ensure that agencies like the SEC remain subordinate to democratic lawmaking processes.
There is other evidence that could further expose the SEC to charges that it is behaving not just unfairly, but undemocratically. On Wednesday, Robinhood officials testified that they had spent 16 months working with the SEC to register the company’s crypto sales service as a special purpose digital asset broker-dealer. According to their counsel, a former SEC commissioner himself, they were “pretty summarily told in March … that we would not see any fruits of that effort.”
That gets to the deep question about Gensler’s representations over the past two years. While he has on multiple occasions repeated some version of “these companies just need to come in and register,” it now appears that may simply have been a lie.
The preponderance of evidence, as argued this week by Blockchain Association Chief Policy Officer Jake Chervinsky among others, suggests Gensler’s real goal is to effectively ban crypto in the U.S. In fact, Gensler’s intent or mindstate seem fairly irrelevant here – the effects of his and his agency’s actions, if uncontested, would ultimately be the elimination of not just crypto businesses and development, but ultimately even its practical usability by individuals, from United States soil.
Given the apparent interest of elected U.S. representatives in a more measured approach, it seems clear that Gensler’s SEC is overstepping its moral authority. It will be up to the courts to determine the legalities.
Since the collapse of large crypto projects like FTX and BlockFi, investors have been cautious about parking their funds with centralized exchanges, which, some believe, are susceptible to collapse in ways that might leave their customers empty-handed.
To access services like staking rewards, centralized exchanges often require customers to “lock up” their tokens in accounts that can’t be accessed for a period of time, or might be used by an exchange for other purposes. So when panic strikes or there’s a bank run, as in the case of FTX, customer funds can be lost altogether. With the collapse of these firms, investors learned that when their funds are delegated to a third party, it no longer fully belongs to them. As the expression goes, “not your keys, not your crypto.”
