[deleted]
The SEC has told us it wants to sue us over Lend. We don’t know why
131–140 of 454 posts
Re: The SEC has told us it wants to sue us over Lend. We don’t know why
#132I actually initially wanted to be on Coinbase’s side here, but after a quick google of “Howey test” and reading even just the introduction on Wikipedia, I cannot imagine how they don’t see the SEC’s reasoning about Lend wrt Howey. If you want to argue that Howey does not apply or fight the decision/lawsuit, then fine. But feigning ignorance of something a (non-legal expert) programmer can connect the dots of instantl…
Correct me if I'm wrong but the bigger problem here seems to be that there is now way to "fight the decision" other than ignoring it, getting sued and maybe winning in court?
Re: The SEC has told us it wants to sue us over Lend. We don’t know why
#133Earlier quoted context omitted.
> …all of the SEC’s questions in writing and then again in person… They asked for documents and written responses… Plain as day! And since you have so much experience dealing with the SEC, you surely understand that the specific questions they ask will typically reveal precisely their rationale for taking the (extraordinary) step of an enforcement action, just as a prosecutor’s investigatory questions reveals their l…
The SEC can and does provide candid advice. I know entrepreneurs who have had lengthy calls with both state and federal SEC reps who will give straight talk. This is not that. This is preparation to make a court case to use as precedent to attack the industry. I feel the SEC is being a bad actor - stifling innovation rather than encouraging it. Over the last 10 years the HN chattering class has dismissed crypto endle…
[deleted]
Re: The SEC has told us it wants to sue us over Lend. We don’t know why
#134Earlier quoted context omitted.
> …all of the SEC’s questions in writing and then again in person… They asked for documents and written responses… Plain as day! And since you have so much experience dealing with the SEC, you surely understand that the specific questions they ask will typically reveal precisely their rationale for taking the (extraordinary) step of an enforcement action, just as a prosecutor’s investigatory questions reveals their l…
The SEC can and does provide candid advice. I know entrepreneurs who have had lengthy calls with both state and federal SEC reps who will give straight talk. This is not that. This is preparation to make a court case to use as precedent to attack the industry. I feel the SEC is being a bad actor - stifling innovation rather than encouraging it. Over the last 10 years the HN chattering class has dismissed crypto endle…
>I laugh all the way to the bank...
Cool.
Re: The SEC has told us it wants to sue us over Lend. We don’t know why
#135From the Coinbase page about Lend: >Lend your crypto to earn 4% APY >Your principal is guaranteed This definitely seems fishy. I don't see how this is possible unless if their position isn't levered. However, if they aren't levered, then why can't they just lend USDC themselves?
A friend of mine tried to pitch me Nexo (nexo.io). He uses it to get up to 12% APY on his crypto lending - I can't wrap my head around it...
Re: The SEC has told us it wants to sue us over Lend. We don’t know why
#136Earlier quoted context omitted.
Mortgage backed securities are securities even though they are loans under the hood. Bond is also a loan. Same with money market accounts. There are a bunch of debt securities.
Once you package it up into a tradable instrument, it becomes a security, which would either be regulated by the SEC (bonds) or the CFTC (swaps or futures). But if it isn't tradable (which a lending account is not), it's not a security. It's likely the jurisdiction of FINRA or the FDIC.
My sweep account on my brokerage is regulated by the SEC. I can’t trade it. Some of the challenger banks are using sweep accounts instead of standard deposit accounts. Just look at the ones with a broker dealer license.
Re: The SEC has told us it wants to sue us over Lend. We don’t know why
#137I actually initially wanted to be on Coinbase’s side here, but after a quick google of “Howey test” and reading even just the introduction on Wikipedia, I cannot imagine how they don’t see the SEC’s reasoning about Lend wrt Howey. If you want to argue that Howey does not apply or fight the decision/lawsuit, then fine. But feigning ignorance of something a (non-legal expert) programmer can connect the dots of instantl…
Correct me if I'm wrong but the bigger problem here seems to be that there is now way to "fight the decision" other than ignoring it, getting sued and maybe winning in court?
Maybe they could sue for a declaratory judgment?
Re: The SEC has told us it wants to sue us over Lend. We don’t know why
#138I actually initially wanted to be on Coinbase’s side here, but after a quick google of “Howey test” and reading even just the introduction on Wikipedia, I cannot imagine how they don’t see the SEC’s reasoning about Lend wrt Howey. If you want to argue that Howey does not apply or fight the decision/lawsuit, then fine. But feigning ignorance of something a (non-legal expert) programmer can connect the dots of instantl…
> I cannot imagine how they don’t see the SEC’s reasoning about Lend wrt Howey. If you want to argue that Howey does not apply or fight the decision/lawsuit, then fine. But feigning ignorance of something a (non-legal expert) programmer can connect the dots of instantly just makes me feel like they’re playing a PR game. Grewal was a federal (magistrate) judge in SF before he quit to go work at Facebook. Everyone I kn…
You misunderstand the legal field if you think a lawyer should be given the benefit of the doubt when arguing on behlf of a client. Their job is to use the most persuasive propaganda they can get away with.
Re: The SEC has told us it wants to sue us over Lend. We don’t know why
#139Earlier quoted context omitted.
> …all of the SEC’s questions in writing and then again in person… They asked for documents and written responses… Plain as day! And since you have so much experience dealing with the SEC, you surely understand that the specific questions they ask will typically reveal precisely their rationale for taking the (extraordinary) step of an enforcement action, just as a prosecutor’s investigatory questions reveals their l…
The SEC can and does provide candid advice. I know entrepreneurs who have had lengthy calls with both state and federal SEC reps who will give straight talk. This is not that. This is preparation to make a court case to use as precedent to attack the industry. I feel the SEC is being a bad actor - stifling innovation rather than encouraging it. Over the last 10 years the HN chattering class has dismissed crypto endle…
> I laugh all the way to the bank…
You ran an ICO that settled with the SEC. I’m not clear on what value you offered to the public, or how you justify “making bank”?
Re: The SEC has told us it wants to sue us over Lend. We don’t know why
#140Earlier quoted context omitted.
But all contracts have some element of counterparty risk. Contractual guarantees are just contractual, nobody can give absolute guarantees of anything.
Lots of defi has no counterparty risk. Much of it is over collateralised and managed by smart contacts. There is of course software risk in the smart contract (although I think people underestimate that in conventional finance too).
What you are saying is totally debunked by the sheer number of Defi hacks,rug pulls and exoloits the previous year resulting in billions of lost money. That defi has no counterparty risk is probably one of thr all time wrong sentences on HN.