51–60 of 61 posts
I know this is how the US operates, still it's weird to trade cash for criminal allegations. Especially when Binance has been so vilified. I'm not defending Binance, rather, it feels like the SEC rhetoric went past the point where a fine is appropriate. Unless they are only proposing it so they can't be accused of not giving them the same treatment that everyone else gets.
So, in the USA, you can do wrongs and then buy your way out of it, such that doing wrong and the resulting fines are just a cost of doing business however you see fit?
After a certain threshold, financial crime is rebranded as "lobbying" and is rewarded instead of punished.
So, in the USA, you can do wrongs and then buy your way out of it, such that doing wrong and the resulting fines are just a cost of doing business however you see fit?
Hell if you're rich enough you get to enforce US laws in foreign nations. Reading the US trade office reports is seriously disgusting to me. "Stakeholders" this, "stakeholders" that.
So, in the USA, you can do wrongs and then buy your way out of it, such that doing wrong and the resulting fines are just a cost of doing business however you see fit?
Just find something that can be rationalized as value and the US will play along
If you cant: straight to jail, stay there till the trial or take a horrible plea deal that ensures your incarceration but for theoretically less time than losing at trial
Wow, I was expecting about half that. I think this would be the second largest DPA ever. BNP Paribas paid $9 billion, Airbus paid $3.9 billion, Wells Fargo $3 billion, ... I wonder if the SEC/CFTC stuff will be resolved too. That's the deal BitMEX got but this case is way more substantial than just not registering as a money transmitter.
Maybe it's an opening bid that could be negotiated down to 50%. Half kidding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Residing in the UAE also wouldn't prevent extraordinary rendition should it come to that...
No need to go that far. The lack of an extradition treaty doesn’t preclude extradition. Instead of having a formalized process in place it would have to be done case by case. This is a common misconception about extradition treaties in general.
I know this is how the US operates, still it's weird to trade cash for criminal allegations. Especially when Binance has been so vilified. I'm not defending Binance, rather, it feels like the SEC rhetoric went past the point where a fine is appropriate. Unless they are only proposing it so they can't be accused of not giving them the same treatment that everyone else gets.
> I know this is how the US operates, still it's weird to trade cash for criminal allegations. I would imagine that the US is not unique in either (1) making corporations liable for crime, or (2) having the principal sanction against the corporation itself for any crime be either monetary or a combination of monetary sanction and injunction or similar behavioral controls.
If they did care, then paying (some amount) to get off scott free wouldn't be an option.
The current approach of allowing payola (like this) just encourages bad actors.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
After a certain threshold, financial crime is rebranded as "lobbying" and is rewarded instead of punished.
I feel you're going to have to do a bit more work to explain why this lobbying -> reward, vs. crime -> financial penalty, analogy makes sense.
You don't want to pay capital gains taxes, so you lobby that it is legal to separate obviously unified entity into on-shore bankrupt one, and off-shore profitable one in Ireland or whatever, bribed politicians make it a law and suddenly no taxes are required. You have a chicken farm for which you don't want to pay for extremely expensive utilization of the ill and dead birds, so you lobby to reduce some restrictions written in law and voila, now you can dump your dead birds at a common garbage dump. These are just some illustrative examples.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I feel you're going to have to do a bit more work to explain why this lobbying -> reward, vs. crime -> financial penalty, analogy makes sense.
Financial crime can't exist truly hidden in the modern world. Someone always know about it happening. So bribing those in the know is an integral part of the financial crime. And at certain scale bribes get to be renamed as lobbying, while being in essence the same bribes. Bribes are illegal, but lobbying is not, that's what the reward is. Corporation get to legalize their ill gotten money and have no problems with t…
Also CZ has just stepped down and will be getting legally charged now.