Cryptonews’ Post

SEC Stings Backfired: Crypto Snooping Gets Rethink (source) Forget digital honey pots, the SEC just got stung by a judge over crypto surveillance! Now, they're buzzing with a possible change in how they watch the crypto hive. Buckle up for: ‼️ Judge Buzzkills SEC's Snooping: Think a gavel smashing a hidden camera, not a drone over beehives. A court ruled their data-gathering methods were too invasive, prompting the SEC to rethink. ‼️ New Sting in the Tail?: The SEC might come back with different ways to track crypto transactions, raising privacy concerns for traders. ‼️ Buckle Up for Bumpy Flight: This ain't a guaranteed picnic in the flower field. Stay tuned for the SEC's next move, potential legal battles, and whether crypto gets stung again or enjoys a pollen-filled future. The SEC vs. crypto surveillance saga's just begun. Dive deeper to analyze the legal arguments, compare other digital asset regulations, and see if you're joining the fight against snooping or waiting for the buzzing to subside.

It was fun speaking with Dave Michaels last month to discuss 2023’s momentous developments in the current SEC’s crypto odyssey. Dave’s astute article recognized an unfortunate consequence of the SEC’s enforcement approach: “a winner isn’t likely to emerge in 2024 and neither is certainty about who regulates crypto.” So heading a legal department in this industry will continue to involve substantial measures of patience, prescience, and ongoing attention to traditional financial regulatory compliance. I’m a former SEC staffer, and also a longtime believer in the potential of blockchain and crypto. There's not as much tension between those 2 roles as there might appear to some in this space. When I began “digital asset” work at the SEC in 2015, it wasn’t of interest to many of my colleagues; you had to “opt in” by seeking out these matters and learning the technical aspects necessary to understand them. I am grateful to my former agency for the resources it provided to do that learning, and will never regret diving down this rabbit hole. I’m also a realist who’s seen the damage wrought by the current SEC leadership’s campaign. This is apparent both in the inhospitable climate that has driven talent and innovation from the U.S., and the uncharacteristic legal setbacks the SEC has experienced, many due to the intransigent viewpoint that the offering-stage analysis from _U.S. v. Howey_ can be refashioned to apply almost universally. But I’m also an irrepressible optimist. I think crypto regulation will come sooner rather than later, though the precise path by which this happens (legislation, litigation, regulation (perhaps post-election), etc.) may not yet be clear. The old adage is that “everything in DC is impossible, until it’s inevitable.” Perhaps this industry's path forward never seemed truly "impossible," but positive momentum over the past year makes its future seem increasingly inevitable. Dave’s article highlighted many notable developments underlying this drive, and observers have heralded the noticeably increased appetite for continued innovation in this space, whether in traditional crypto, blockchain tech, or the intersection of tokenization and real world assets. I can't wait until this time next year - 2025 - when Dave's written another authoritative look back on everything new from the past 12 months; I look forward to reading it!

Dive into the ongoing clash between the SEC and crypto in 2023. Discover the hurdles in regulations and changing trends influencing the crypto world's future https://lnkd.in/dKDWBs4P

Achieving Financial Privacy: How Anonymous Crypto Trading Platforms are Revolutionizing ...: As digital currencies gain mainstream acceptance, securing financial privacy is becoming a significant concern for many crypto traders. The concept of ...

The big deal is NOT that crypto is now a political issue (always has been) and it is NOT that the partisan divide is between innovators and those that want more protection/control (not as clear cut as you’d think) – no, it’s much deeper than that. The big deal is that **more people are asking important questions**. And they’re doing this because crypto is now part of the presidential election. They’re doing this because the discussion is now reaching mainstream dinner tables. And this is very good news. Should governments decide what industries get support, or should the market? Should governments decide who has access to money, or to energy? Who controls what can be used as money, and why? And just how much protection do investors deserve/need, and at what cost? These are things that NEED to be thought about if we can get back to appreciating democracy and financial freedom. THAT'S the big deal. It’s not having crypto in the headlines. It’s not the jump in profile. It’s the empowering questions that shine an uncomfortable light on fundamental issues we haven't been thinking about enough. Democracy dies through neglect - maybe crypto is the spark that reignites our interest in who gets to decide just how far our freedoms go. https://lnkd.in/drAEVx9g

We have a saying in this newsletter: crypto contains multitudes. It’s a technology, marketplace, industry, even a culture. Recently it has dabbled in being a political faction. So now that Donald Trump is officially pro-crypto, it’s worth examining exactly what that means. A 16-page document the Trump campaign published this week entitled “2024 GOP Platform” adds a layer of detail—coded as partisan red meat—to the campaign rhetoric Trump has adopted over the past month or two. As part of a section called “Championing Innovation,” the platform features two sentences devoted specifically to #crypto: "Republicans will end Democrats’ unlawful and unAmerican Crypto crackdown and oppose the creation of a Central Bank Digital Currency. We will defend the right to mine Bitcoin, and ensure every American has the right to self-custody of [sic] their Digital Assets, and transact free from Government Surveillance and Control." Beneath the partisan language is a glimpse of how President Trump: Part Deux might deal with crypto—but also unanswered questions about how he would be different than Joe Biden. Let’s go line by line.

This week might be the biggest week for crypto from a regulatory, policy, and legislative standpoint ever. Like it or not, crypto is officially a political football for this election cycle, and Congress is quickly beginning to understand that it's no longer a niche industry that can be ignored or bullied. Nearly 60 million Americans own crypto; which represents an increasingly young and diverse constituency traditionally relied upon by the Democratic Party. The game is changing very rapidly, in real-time, with 2 mainstage events that deserve close attention this week: 1. Biden must decide whether to veto the U.S. Senate’s bipartisan repeal of SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin 121 (SAB 121). SAB 121 is a crypto accounting rule (issued in 2022 without a formal rule-making process) that imposes significant burdens on cryptocurrency custodians – like banks – by requiring them to record crypto assets on their own balance sheets, resulting in major capital implications. Last week the U.S. Senate voted 60-38 to repeal SAB 121 in a bipartisan rebuke of the current SEC and its political supporters, like Senator Warren. Senate Maj. Leader Schumer was among the Democratic supporters of the repeal. In response, Biden threatened to veto Congress’ resolution to overturn the SEC’s policy. The question now is whether Biden will in fact follow through on this veto threat. Last week I thought a Biden veto was a near certainty. This week the wind has completely shifted and I think it’s likely we see the White House pivot away from its veto threat in an attempt to mitigate the anti-crypto political fallout caused by Gary Gensler and Senator Warren. 2. The U.S. House votes on the Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century (FIT21) Act. Tomorrow Congress will bring FIT21 to a vote on the House floor. FIT21 attempts to create a comprehensive U.S. regulatory framework and statutory regime for the SEC and CFTC to regulate digital asset markets, including crypto assets and digital asset exchanges. Under FIT21, digital assets would be assessed using a series of factors that would determine whether the asset is a “restricted digital asset” under SEC jurisdiction, or a “digital commodity” subject to CFTC jurisdiction. However, FIT21 also offers a uniquely adaptive approach that permits this classification to remain fluid to accommodate development of digital asset projects from centralized to decentralized products/networks. While FIT21 is not likely to pass the U.S. Senate in its current form, there is increasing optimism that it may have the support to pass in the House tomorrow. If so, this would be a landmark win for the crypto industry, U.S. consumers, and efforts to keep technological innovation here in America. If this type of sensible legislation resonates with you, I highly recommend reaching out to your Representative to voice your support for FIT21. The below Stand With Crypto resource can connect you with your Rep via phone/email in just minutes.

🚨 Crypto Policy Alert: Uniswap CEO Calls for Change! 🌐 #CryptoRegulation #Uniswap Uniswap CEO Hayden Adams has publicly urged President Biden to reverse current crypto policies, warning that the administration's stance could impact the 2024 election. Adams highlights the aggressive regulatory approach led by the SEC and others, suggesting it could alienate voters interested in crypto innovation and security. 🔗 For an in-depth look at the implications for crypto's future, check out the full story:

Gemini urges CFTC to withdraw proposed rule on event contracts. Co-founder Cameron Winklevoss argues crypto prediction platforms offer unmatched integrity. Winklevoss wrote in his X post: "The CFTC should withdraw its Proposed Rule on event contracts, which would categorically ban all event contracts in the U.S., like those traded on Polymarket, the world's largest prediction market." He also claimed, "Unlike polls, pundits, or expert opinions, they require participants to put their money where their mouth is — to have skin in the game. This proof of stake requirement gives them an integrity that other information sources cannot claim." Winklevoss emphasized: "Decentralized prediction markets are a significant innovation with real public utility." Crypto exchange Coinbase also raised objections to the proposed rule. Coinbase’s CLO Paul Grewal stated that, "The proposal fails to recognize the public benefits of prediction markets." The proposed rule comes after five US senators and three representatives want CFTC to ban betting on the 2024 presidential election, citing potential interference with elections. What are your thoughts on the Proposed Rule on event contracts? 🧐