211–220 of 557 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ethereum ICO‘d and therefore doesn’t pass the Howey test.
The Howey test is applied to the current status of an asset. It doesn't take an asset's origins into consideration. If you believe that Ethereum currently represents "an investment of money in a common enterprise with a reasonable expectation of profits to be derived from the efforts of others", then it is a security. If not, then not.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Either way, it's not the job of the SEC (Securities regulator) to decide coinbase gets a free pass to ignore securities regulation in this case because the existing regulations make their business model impossible. I guess that's the job of congress, then. I think the SEC Stabilization Act is an excellent start. There's nothing unreasonable about wanting to broker securities on a public ledger.
Well in the normal, boring old securities world broker/dealers don't also get to operate exchanges and offer securities to unqualified investors. I don't think it's the "public ledger" part of this that causes the regulatory issue frankly.
Myself I think that's precisely the issue the SEC is hung up on, but we could argue endlessly about what is probably causing the regulatory issue with the SEC and what they are probably okay and probably not okay with. Meanwhile, the UK just laid out a clear framework for crypto securities exchange in their new bill, which gives an unambiguous regulatory green light to any companies who want to relocate there.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Bitcoin has a centralized development team who is focused on increasing the coin's value. By writing more efficient clients, coordinating soft forks, and curating standards, the Bitcoin Core dev team is directly supporting the asset. So why did the SEC declare it not to be a security? We could speculate as much as we want, but at the end of the day these are the hard-hitting questions that the SEC has been avoiding,…
It's not centralized...
To me, that sounds like a centralized team employing centralized decision making.
If I used Coinbase to purchase ETH (and it's still held there) should I be moving those assets right about now?
Yesterday would be fine too. In general you should not hold a balance anywhere but in a bank that is backed by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) or your local equivalent. If it's pocket change then it doesn't really matter.
There are many value that are neither trivial nor worth the effort of upgrading from pretty safe storage to completely safe storage.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
TIL to stop reading the top voted comment if it appears to be outrage and just read the article for myself instead. Just FYI here's the quote in context. She's posing a hypothetical here and not actually comparing Coinbase to a heroin dealer. This is very much in the style of Matt Levine at Bloomberg, btw. If a company went to the FDA and said “hello, we’d like to start selling heroin to the public for recreational u…
She's comparing cryptocurrency to heroin. The parent's point stands.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Which, when you think about it makes sense. Why would consumer protection folks waive consumer protections simply because the would-be issuer confirmed there was no intrinsic value in the offering?
Some people have suggested that coins with no utility or claim on future revenue should be regulated as gambling.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> If it's not even clear what a security is, why would you register as a securities broker/exchange False condition. The SEC has made it clear that various crypto, e.g. Solana, are securities. If you want to trade those, you must register. Again, if you just want to cash trade Bitcoin and Ether, the SEC has shown zero inclination of messing with you.
I can only find a source from 2 days ago that says the SEC claims Solana is a security. Before that afaik the only cryptocurrency the sec had explicitly said was a security was XRP which coinbase delisted
If you want to know whether something is legal or not, you talk to a lawyer or (less reliably) law enforcement. When Coinbase asked the SEC if it needed to register, without—to my knowledge—exception, it said yes.
[1] https://www.sec.gov/litigation/investreport/34-81207.pdf
Earlier quoted context omitted.
No that’s not the case. Coinbase wants CLARITY. The SEC does not give any guidance, response, or anything related to this issue. At the same time it’s a laat struggle between the SEC and the CFTC. The SEC messed up for years but not protecting consumers against fraud. Now they’re trying to prove their reason existence / gov funding. In one of the (I think MIT lectures 2018) videos, btw? Gensler stated that [probably…
Coinbase has clarity. The SEC is saying "What part of 'no" did you not understand?"
Earlier quoted context omitted.
TIL to stop reading the top voted comment if it appears to be outrage and just read the article for myself instead. Just FYI here's the quote in context. She's posing a hypothetical here and not actually comparing Coinbase to a heroin dealer. This is very much in the style of Matt Levine at Bloomberg, btw. If a company went to the FDA and said “hello, we’d like to start selling heroin to the public for recreational u…
She's comparing cryptocurrency to heroin. The parent's point stands.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Youre completely.ignoring the fact that "heroin is illegal" is cut and dry. Securities are not illegal. Selling them without a license is. Asking them to clarify the law and getting told "the law is clear" is not in any way the same as selling heroin knowing it is illegal.
The law is clear. It's not the job of regulatory agencies to advise companies on how to become compliant with the law and their rules. The law and their rules are...the law and their rules! Hire a lawyer for that!
Honestly this should be a core mission of all regulatory agencies and the fact that it isn't is a disgrace.