Coinbase issued Wells notice by SEC

Post by TylerE » Thu, Mar 23, 2023, 12:49 AM UTC

cududa wrote: post #51

Alex3917 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, it is something of a he said/she said between Coinbase and the SEC. Not really. The law has been exactly the same since the 1940s. Apparently though Coinbase has decided to go all in on SBF's strategy of pretending to be too dumb to understand the law. Coinbase arguing that they should be allowed to sell illegal unregistered securities because the SEC said they could sell securities is like CVS arguing that s…

Or Nasdaq claiming that moving orders from paper ledgers to computers means they’re no longer a securities exchange. Because reasons.

Post by ensignavenger » Thu, Mar 23, 2023, 12:52 AM UTC

cududa wrote: post #14

tzm wrote: post #5

> "We asked the SEC specifically to identify which assets on our platforms they believe may be securities, and they declined to do so." Sums up the case quite well.

No it doesn’t. They’ve literally told them in the past when they were creating financial products that they were securities. Their entire schtik is to say “We called it something different so it’s not a security.” SEC: “Yes it is.” Coinbase: “The SEC won’t engage with us and tell us what aspects of our business is a security.” SEC: “1) that’s not how securities law works, you’re the one that has to hire lawyers 2) we…

Post by Alex3917 » Thu, Mar 23, 2023, 12:53 AM UTC

iramiller wrote: post #64

Alex3917 wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Well, it is something of a he said/she said between Coinbase and the SEC. Not really. The law has been exactly the same since the 1940s. Apparently though Coinbase has decided to go all in on SBF's strategy of pretending to be too dumb to understand the law. Coinbase arguing that they should be allowed to sell illegal unregistered securities because the SEC said they could sell securities is like CVS arguing that s…

Well the SEC certainly has one point of view. Unfortunately the CFTC has another view and they both can’t be right so which part of the federal governance applies here? https://www.cftc.gov/digitalassets/index.htm This ambiguity is why clarity is needed. In the famous words of Matt Levine everything is securities fraud. It seems obvious that some legal clarity is actually required here.

Post by codehalo » Thu, Mar 23, 2023, 12:54 AM UTC

adastra22 wrote: post #68

codehalo wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There is no "presale" in the Ethereum code.

Why would that be relevant? It happened, that’s all that matters. Edit: the context of this is the question of whether Ethereum is a security. The SEC has already ruled that it is, and the ruling came down to the fact that it had a presale (via the Howey test).

Post by humanizersequel » Thu, Mar 23, 2023, 12:55 AM UTC

RC_ITR wrote: post #49

yokem55 wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When it comes to the staking side of things - Coinbase's position is that they are simply providing a technical service to their customers to do something that their customer's could do themselves. There isn't a borrower that Coinbase is lending the coins to. It is a protocol that locks them up. Where this gets messy is with things like Eth when they stake amounts less then 32 Eth from a customer, which inherently me…

>- Coinbase's position is that they are simply providing a technical service to their customers to do something that their customer's could do themselves. Sure, I could write multiple mortgages and roll them up into an MBS myself too, isn't the bank just doing the technical work there too?