With the U.S. government cracking down on Binance, slapping the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange with $4.3 billion in fines and forcing its maverick founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao to relinquish control, arch-rival Coinbase sees an opening to reclaim market share by playing the role of the “good guy” traded on Wall Street.
Coinbase shares have jumped some 18% over the past week to around $118 as CEO Brian Armstrong asserted last Tuesday’s settlement finally “closes that chapter of crypto’s history” in which Binance flouted global regulations while handling over $15 trillion in trades since 2017. By contrast, Armstrong now aims to position Nasdaq-listed Coinbase as the compliant, institutional exchange best positioned to capitalize on the crypto industry’s shift toward greater oversight.
“Building a company offshore, skirting regulation, it’s just not going to work,” Armstrong told CNBC, taking a shot across the bow of both Binance as well as consumers who transacted on the exchange drawn by its swift listings of new – often risky – digital assets. With federal agencies now policing crypto’s “Wild West” era, Armstrong wants to reassure investors that Coinbase will work hand-in-hand with authorities, supporting his belief that crypto can operate by the same rules as traditional finance.
Whether such harmony emerges remains clouded by legal issues confronting Coinbase itself, including an ongoing SEC lawsuit filed last June. While Armstrong feels “very good” about Coinbase’s defense and his aim is full regulatory clarity, such certainty seems distant given bitcoin’s recent plunge marking another crypto winter. Nonetheless, the humbling of the industry’s one-time dominant exchange gives his company a momentary edge.
Binance’s astronomical rise represented a meteoric challenge to Coinbase’s early market supremacy following its 2012 launch and 2017 debut on public markets weeks before bitcoin hit a historic peak near $20,000. Former Bloomberg programmer and Tokyo Stock Exchange developer Changpeng Zhao founded Binance in Shanghai in 2017, developing technical capabilities allowing it to scale at warp speed by listing new cryptocurrencies faster than cautious Coinbase.
With an opaque corporate structure based initially in Asia and subsequently the Cayman Islands, Binance also dodged oversight as global regulators sounded alarms. But its explosive growth quickly afforded Zhao celebrity status as one of crypto’s biggest whales and most vocal proselytizers. Meanwhile, to keep pace with its insurgent rival now commanding the majority of trading volumes, Coinbase rushed to expand its offerings but continued adhering to compliance standards in order to maintain institutional investor confidence.
Yet as U.S. authorities targeted Binance last year with a series of harsh punitive actions, momentum swung back toward its compliant competitor. Both the CFTC and SEC ultimately launched suits against Zhao’s exchange for allegedly violating investor protection statutes, culminating in extensive settlement terms compromising Binance’s autonomy going forward. With its renegade era under CZ seemingly finished, Armstrong aims to leverage Coinbase’s head start collaborating openly with financial watchdogs.
Despite his bravado about closing an ignominious chapter for crypto, Armstrong must still confront lingering suspicions from regulators like the SEC about whether any exchanges can provide adequate investor protections around highly speculative digital assets. Coinbase itself has fought SEC assertions that it facilitated unregistered securities trades.
While the two suits differ, both target core business models questioning whether current legislation written before crypto’s advent can properly govern such technologies. Beyond exacting large fines, authorities want to slow crypto trading – putting platforms like Coinbase and Binance in an existential vice grip complicated by token assets’ fluctuation between currency and security classifications.
How Congress and agencies like the SEC ultimately delineate acceptable crypto activity under existing statutes or new legislation could determine which exchanges remain standing. Ironically victories could stem as much from legal ingenuity as technology innovation. But with Binance at least temporarily defanged, Coinbase remains well positioned to shape crypto’s second act blending Wall Street’s institutional trust with Silicon Valley’s disruptive daring.
Clearly the crypto landscape entering 2024 stands on shifting sands, clouded by bitcoin’s swoon, regulatory turbulence and possible global recession. Yet should pioneer blockchain currencies and exchanges somehow emerge resilient, Coinbase sits ready to seize the market share boon a humbled Binance left on the table. After years sparring in crypto’s octagon, this match’s decision appears nearer – though mainstream adoption stays stubbornly out of reach.
In a watershed moment for cryptocurrency oversight, Changpeng Zhao, billionaire founder of crypto exchange Binance, pleaded guilty on Tuesday to charges related to money laundering and sanctions violations. Binance itself also pleaded guilty to similar criminal charges for failing to prevent illegal activity on its platform.
The guilty pleas are part of a sweeping, coordinated crackdown on Binance by U.S. law enforcement and regulators. As part of the settlement, Binance agreed to pay over $4 billion in fines and penalties to various government agencies. Zhao himself will personally pay $200 million in fines and has stepped down as CEO.
The implications of this development on the broader crypto sector could be profound. As the world’s largest crypto trading platform, Binance has played an outsized role in the growth of the industry. Its legal troubles and the record penalties imposed call into question the viability of exchanges that flout compliance rules in the name of rapid expansion.
Prosecutors allege that Binance repeatedly ignored anti-money laundering obligations and allowed drug traffickers, hackers, and even terrorist groups like ISIS to freely use its platform. According to the Department of Justice, Binance processed transactions for mixing services used to launder money and facilitated over 1.5 million trades in violation of U.S. sanctions.
U.S. authorities were unequivocal in their criticism of Binance’s focus on profits over meeting regulatory requirements. This suggests that other exchanges that aggressively pursued growth while turning a “blind eye” to compliance may face similar crackdowns in the future. The $3.4 billion civil penalty imposed on Binance also sets a benchmark for potential fines other non-compliant entities may confront.
The charges against the world’s largest crypto exchange and its high-profile leader represent federal authorities’ most aggressive action yet to rein in lawlessness in the cryptocurrency industry. Officials made clear they will continue targeting crypto companies that break laws around money laundering, sanctions evasion, and other illicit finance.
More broadly, CZ’s guilty plea underscores the pressing need for sensible guardrails if crypto is to shed its reputation as primarily facilitating illegal activity. Though blockchain technology offers many potential benefits, its pseudonymous nature makes it vulnerable to abuse by criminals and terrorists financing unless exchanges rigorously verify customer identities and the source of funds.
For the wider crypto sector, the Binance takedown may spur valuable change. Many experts argue overly lax regulation allowed crypto exchanges to ignore Anti-Money Laundering rules other financial institutions must follow. The billion-dollar penalties against Binance could convince the industry it’s cheaper to self-regulate.
The Binance case may accelerate calls for a regulatory framework tailored to the unique risks posed by cryptocurrencies. Rather than stifle innovation in this nascent industry, thoughtful policies around KYC, anti-money laundering, investor protections and other issues could instill greater confidence in cryptocurrencies among mainstream investors and financial institutions.
Of course, because cryptocurrency transactions are pseudonymous, crypto will likely remain appealing for certain unlawful activities like narcotics sales and ransomware. But with Binance’s guilty plea, regulators sent the message that flagrant non-compliance will not fly. Exchanges allowing outright criminal abuse may face existential legal threats.
For exchanges determined to operate legally, the Binance debacle highlights the existential risks of non-compliance. No matter how large or influential, exchanges that refuse to meet their regulatory responsibilities risk jeopardizing their futures. Expect most exchanges to immediately review their KYC and AML policies in the wake of the Binance penalties.
At minimum, the charges will likely damage Binance’s reputation. Although the company remains operational, it could lose market share to competitors perceived as more law-abiding. For crypto investors, the uncertainty and loss of trust surrounding such a dominant player create fresh volatility in already turbulent markets.
Perhaps most profoundly, seeing handcuffs slapped on crypto’s one-time “king” punctures the industry’s former aura of impunity. After the Binance takedown, ongoing federal probes into FTX and other exchanges, and Sam Bankman-Fried’s criminal conviction, crypto fraudsters might finally fear the consequences many avoided for so long. For better or worse, crypto is evolving.
Sam Bankman-Fried, the disgraced founder and former CEO of the failed cryptocurrency exchange FTX, has been found guilty on all charges related to fraud and money laundering. The verdict was handed down on Thursday by a jury in a Manhattan federal court following over a month of dramatic testimony in one of the most high-profile white collar criminal trials in recent history.
Bankman-Fried faced seven criminal counts tied to allegations he defrauded FTX customers and investors out of billions of dollars. The jury deliberated for approximately four hours before returning guilty verdicts on all counts, affirming the prosecution’s allegations that the 30-year-old knowingly misled investors and misappropriated customer deposits to cover losses at his hedge fund, Alameda Research.
Each fraud count carries a maximum sentence of 20 years in prison, while the money laundering conviction includes up to another 20 years. This brings the total maximum sentence to 115 years behind bars for Bankman-Fried. His sentencing hearing is scheduled for March 2024, where the exact prison term will be determined by Judge Lewis Kaplan.
Rapid Downfall of a Crypto Pioneer
The verdict represents a dramatic demise for Bankman-Fried, who was once hailed as a pioneer within the crypto industry. The MIT graduate founded FTX in 2019, and it grew rapidly to become one of the largest global cryptocurrency exchanges with a valuation of over $30 billion at its peak.
But FTX collapsed almost overnight last November after a report revealed a leaked balance sheet showing Alameda Research owed billions of dollars in loans to FTX. The news triggered a liquidity crisis and customer withdrawals that quickly bankrupted both companies.
Prosecutors presented evidence over the course of the trial that Bankman-Fried had secretly transferred customer funds from FTX to cover losses at Alameda as the hedge fund made a series of failed investments. In total, an estimated $8 billion in customer money vanished.
When asked on the witness stand whether he stole funds, Bankman-Fried testified “I never intended to commit fraud.” But the 12-person jury ultimately sided with the prosecution in deeming his actions fraudulent.
Watershed Moment for Crypto Accountability
The guilty verdict represents a major victory for authorities seeking greater accountability within the largely unregulated crypto industry. Bankman-Fried’s conviction on all criminal charges related to the FTX collapse will likely spur further calls for regulation to protect investors participating in digital asset markets.
Many Industry observers believe the prosecution and ultimate guilty verdict for Bankman-Fried will serve as a warning for other crypto executives. His undoing may deter similar misconduct, as leaders now know they can face severe criminal repercussions for defrauding customers.
While the FTX saga damaged trust in cryptocurrencies broadly, the decisive guilty verdict helps restore some faith that justice can be served. Investors who lost their savings when FTX failed may find some solace knowing its founder and chief architect will now likely serve substantial prison time.
For Bankman-Fried himself, the future now looks increasingly bleak. His sentencing in March 2024 will determine exactly how many years he’ll spend incarcerated for the crimes that led to FTX’s epic collapse and wiped out billions in customer funds. But the outcome is already clear – his fraud conviction ensures Bankman-Fried will go down in history as a disgraced figure instead of the visionary entrepreneur he once portrayed himself to be.
Cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase is increasingly confident that a bitcoin exchange-traded fund (ETF) will soon be approved by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), following the regulator’s recent court loss blocking Grayscale’s bitcoin fund from becoming an ETF.
Paul Grewal, Coinbase’s chief legal officer, told CNBC that the company is “quite hopeful” that pending bitcoin ETF applications will now be approved by the SEC. He highlighted that they should be granted under the law, referring to the Appeals Court ruling that the SEC had no basis to deny Grayscale’s bid to convert its Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC) into an ETF.
The SEC decided last week not to appeal that court decision, likely clearing the path for a bitcoin ETF to be greenlit in the coming months. While Grewal did not give a timeline, he expressed confidence the SEC will now approve a bitcoin ETF application soon since it cannot arbitrarily reject them following its court loss.
A bitcoin ETF would allow mainstream investors to gain exposure to the cryptocurrency through investing in the fund, without having to directly purchase and hold bitcoin. This could benefit crypto exchanges like Coinbase which are commonly held assets in portfolios aiming to give investors crypto exposure.
However, Grayscale still faces some challenges converting its popular GBTC fund into an ETF. Its parent company Digital Currency Group (DCG), along with Genesis Trading and Gemini crypto exchange, were recently accused in a lawsuit by New York’s attorney general of defrauding investors to the tune of over $1 billion.
Nevertheless, Grewal sounded positive that additional bitcoin ETF products will be coming online soon as the SEC complies with court rulings requiring it to evaluate ETF applications neutrally, solely based on their merits.
Bitcoin has stealthily risen around 72% so far this year, recovering strongly after huge declines in 2022. Driving this comeback is renewed investor interest thanks to expectations of fewer Fed interest rate hikes, and hype building ahead of bitcoin’s next “halving” event in 2024 which will reduce bitcoin mining rewards by 50%, constricting supply.
However, crypto trading volumes have declined recently, as retail investors remain gun-shy after massive crashes of large players like FTX, BlockFi and Three Arrows Capital. The collapses have bred distrust of centralized crypto intermediaries.
Grewal expressed encouragement that “bad actors” in crypto like FTX are being held criminally accountable for alleged multibillion dollar fraud. He believes this will renew consumer interest in cryptocurrency investments.
FTX filed for bankruptcy last year amid a liquidity crunch after investors fled the platform over concerns on its financial stability. Its founder Sam Bankman-Fried was criminally charged by US prosecutors over allegations he defrauded FTX customers and investors out of billions. Bankman-Fried has pleaded not guilty and is currently facing trial.
While the crypto winter persists, Grewal foresees developments on the horizon that will entice investors back into digital assets. The expected approval of a bitcoin ETF could be one catalyst. With blue chip financial giants like Fidelity Investments, CME Group and others applying for bitcoin ETFs, credibility could be lent to crypto as an asset class.
As bitcoin and the broader crypto industry aim to rebuild trust, regulators are focused on rooting out bad actors and holding companies to account for violating securities laws. This could pave the way for institutional investors to gain comfort with crypto, with an ETF providing easy exposure.
If the SEC delivers on expectations and approves a bitcoin ETF application in 2023, it would cap a multi-year effort by the industry and represent a major milestone in mainstream acceptance of cryptocurrencies. For exchanges like Coinbase seeking to broaden their client bases, it could provide a crucial on-ramp for the next generation of crypto investors.
The criminal trial of Sam Bankman-Fried, the disgraced founder of bankrupt crypto exchange FTX, kicks off on Tuesday in New York. Bankman-Fried faces seven charges related to allegedly misusing billions in customer funds to cover losses at his hedge fund, Alameda Research. If convicted on all counts, he could face over 100 years in prison.
The charges include wire fraud, conspiracy to commit wire fraud, securities fraud, conspiracy to commit money laundering, and conspiracy to commit bank fraud. Prosecutors claim Bankman-Fried orchestrated “one of the biggest financial frauds in American history” by funneling customer deposits from FTX to Alameda to cover bad bets.
Up to $8 billion in customer money has allegedly gone missing. The government’s star witnesses will likely be former Alameda CEO Caroline Ellison and FTX co-founder Gary Wang, both of whom have pleaded guilty to charges and are cooperating.
The trial is anticipated to last 6 weeks. Jury selection begins Tuesday morning. Bankman-Fried has pleaded not guilty, and his defense may argue he was following lawyer guidance and unaware his actions were illegal. A second trial on additional charges is set for March 2024.
The Rise and Fall of Sam Bankman-Fried
Bankman-Fried first made his name in 2017 exploiting arbitrage opportunities in bitcoin prices across exchanges. He launched trading firm Alameda Research to capitalize on these trades. Alameda’s success led to the 2019 founding of FTX, which offered innovative crypto trading products.
Bankman-Fried amassed a $26 billion personal fortune at one point. He became a major political donor and crypto’s poster child. But in 2022, as crypto prices crashed, his empire crumbled. Regulators allege Bankman-Fried secretly used FTX customer deposits to cover Alameda’s losses from the start.
Though FTX claimed to have robust risk management, it had little record-keeping. Alameda lost $3.7 billion despite claims it was profitable. It used FTX customer funds and overvalued FTT tokens as collateral for billions in loans. Lenders issued margin calls in 2022, but Alameda lacked assets to cover debts.
The Collapse and Charges
When FTX’s reliance on customer funds was exposed, customers raced to withdraw. But FTX didn’t have their money. Bankman-Fried tried unsuccessfully to find investors for a bailout. He claimed publicly that assets were fine, but privately admitted billions were missing. FTX paused withdrawals, and Bankman-Fried turned to rival Binance for a takeover.
But the deal fell through as the extent of missing funds and mismanagement was revealed. Bankman-Fried resigned, and FTX filed bankruptcy on November 11, 2022. The DOJ arrested Bankman-Fried in the Bahamas in December on fraud and money laundering charges. Prosecutors allege he knowingly misled investors and misused billions in customer deposits from the very start.
Billions Remain Missing
While FTX’s bankruptcy team has recovered over $7 billion so far, billions more in customer funds remain unaccounted for. Bankman-Fried was previously hailed as an effective altruist who touted crypto’s potential for good. But regulators say greed and deception drove FTX from the beginning. The human toll of lost life savings won’t be fully known for some time.
Bankman-Fried now faces the prospect of spending most of his life in prison. The outcome of the trial could shape crypto regulation going forward. But the damage to retail investors and confidence in the industry has already been done. Crypto may never fully shed the stain of FTX’s epic collapse.
The bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange FTX has taken a surprising legal step by launching a legal battle against Allan Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried, the parents of its former CEO and founder, Sam Bankman-Fried. The lawsuit aims to recover both luxury property and millions of dollars in what FTX alleges to be “fraudulently transferred and misappropriated funds.”
FTX, once a rising star in the cryptocurrency world, faced financial turmoil amid allegations of extensive financial misconduct. The exchange’s new leadership has been working tirelessly to locate the billions of dollars in missing assets. Their latest move is an attempt to hold Bankman and Fried accountable.
Legal representatives of the FTX bankruptcy estate assert that Allan Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried “exploited their access and influence within the FTX enterprise to enrich themselves, directly and indirectly, by millions of dollars.” This stunning accusation suggests that Bankman and Fried might have played a significant role in the financial irregularities that led to FTX’s collapse.
One of the most notable claims in the lawsuit is that Bankman and Fried discussed transferring a $10 million cash gift and a $16.4 million luxury property in The Bahamas to their son, Sam Bankman-Fried, despite FTX’s precarious financial situation. This raises questions about whether Bankman and Fried were aware of the exchange’s dire financial straits.
The lawsuit doesn’t stop there. It also alleges that as early as 2019, Allan Bankman actively participated in efforts to cover up a whistleblower complaint that could have “exposed the FTX Group as a house of cards.” The lawsuit cites emails written by Bankman in which he complained about his annual salary being only $200,000 when he believed he was “supposed to be getting $1M/yr.” The suit portrays this as Bankman lobbying his son to significantly increase his own salary.
Shockingly, within two weeks of these discussions, the suit claims that Sam Bankman-Fried collectively gifted his parents $10 million in funds from Alameda. Within three months, Bankman and Fried were deeded the $16.4 million property in The Bahamas. The timing and circumstances of these transactions raise serious questions about their legality and ethical implications.
Moreover, the lawsuit alleges that Bankman-Fried’s parents urged substantial political and charitable contributions, including significant amounts to Stanford University, seemingly aimed at enhancing Bankman and Fried’s professional and social status. Barbara Fried is also accused of encouraging her son and others within the company to avoid or even violate federal campaign finance disclosure rules by engaging in straw donations or concealing the FTX Group as the source of the contributions.
The involvement of Bankman-Fried’s parents in these activities is particularly noteworthy. Both are accomplished legal scholars who have taught at Stanford Law School. Barbara Fried specializes in ethics, while Allan Bankman’s expertise is in taxes. Their involvement in the alleged misconduct at FTX raises questions about their awareness of the situation and their potential role in enabling it.
Sam Bankman-Fried himself is independently facing multiple wire and securities fraud charges related to the alleged multibillion-dollar FTX fraud. Federal prosecutors and regulators have accused him of orchestrating “one of the biggest financial frauds in American history.” Bankman-Fried has maintained his innocence and pleaded not guilty to all charges. His criminal trial is scheduled to commence on October 3 in Manhattan.
The lawsuit against Bankman and Fried asserts that they “either knew or ignored bright red flags revealing that their son, Bankman-Fried, and other FTX Insiders were orchestrating a vast fraudulent scheme.” This suggests that FTX believes the parents played a more significant role in the alleged fraud than previously thought.
In their legal action against Bankman and Fried, FTX seeks various forms of compensatory relief, including punitive damages. The exchange aims to hold them accountable for their alleged “conscious, willful, wanton, and malicious conduct” that contributed to FTX’s financial woes. Additionally, FTX is looking to recover any property or payments made to the couple from the exchange.
The outcome of this legal battle remains uncertain, and it raises questions about how any potential clawbacks may affect Bankman and Fried’s ability to support their son’s legal defense as he faces criminal charges. The legal counsel for Allan Joseph Bankman and Barbara Fried has vehemently denied the allegations, characterizing them as “completely false.” They view FTX’s legal action as an attempt to intimidate their clients and undermine the upcoming trial of their child.
The implications of this legal showdown extend beyond the immediate parties involved. FTX’s efforts to recover lost assets and hold those responsible accountable are a crucial chapter in the cryptocurrency industry’s ongoing struggle with regulatory scrutiny and legal challenges. The outcome of this case may set a precedent for how authorities and stakeholders deal with alleged fraud and financial misconduct in the rapidly evolving world of cryptocurrencies.
As the legal battle unfolds, it will be closely watched by industry observers, legal experts, and cryptocurrency enthusiasts alike. The allegations and accusations against the parents of Sam Bankman-Fried have added another layer of complexity to a case that has already drawn significant attention and could have far-reaching consequences for the cryptocurrency ecosystem.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the Financial Stability Board (FSB) have jointly released a new policy paper laying out recommendations for regulating cryptocurrencies and crypto assets. The paper comes at the request of India, which currently holds the presidency of the G20 intergovernmental forum.
The policy recommendations aim to provide guidance to various jurisdictions on addressing risks associated with crypto activities, particularly those related to stablecoins and decentralized finance (DeFi). However, the paper does not set any new policies or regulatory expectations itself.
Stablecoins have emerged as a major focus area. The IMF and FSB warn that stablecoins pegged to hold a stable value can suddenly become volatile. This may pose threats to financial stability, especially as adoption of stablecoins grows.
The paper also examines risks from the fast-growing DeFi ecosystem. It argues that while DeFi aims to replicate traditional financial functions in a decentralized manner, it does not substantively differ in the services offered. Furthermore, DeFi may propagate similar risks seen in traditional finance around liquidity mismatches, interconnectedness, leverage, and inadequate governance.
However, the IMF and FSB continue to argue against blanket bans on cryptocurrencies. They state that policy should instead focus on understanding and addressing the underlying consumer demand for digital assets and payments.
Take a moment to look at Bit Digital Inc., a sustainability focused generator of digital assets.
The policy recommendations could have significant impacts on crypto companies. Stablecoin issuers and DeFi platforms would likely face greater regulatory scrutiny and standards around risk management. Exchanges may see heightened AML/CFT rules, while custodial services could get more consumer protection and security requirements. Miners and infrastructure providers may also face new oversight on risks and energy usage.
Crypto firms would likely need to invest substantially in compliance to meet new regulatory mandates. While this could raise costs, it may also boost institutional confidence in the emerging crypto space. As crypto adoption grows globally, regulators are trying to balance innovation with appropriate safeguards.
A different play in the Bitcoin space, Bitcoin Depot (BTM) provides its users with simple, efficient and intuitive means of converting cash into Bitcoin, which users can deploy in the payments, spending and investing space. Users can convert cash to Bitcoin at Bitcoin Depot’s kiosks and at thousands of name-brand retail locations through its BDCheckout product.
Bitcoin and Ethereum had a bad day. After gaining a lot of upward momentum from late June after Blackrock, Fidelity, and Invesco filed to create bitcoin-related exchange traded funds (ETFs), the volatile assets have shown cryptocurrency investors that the bumpy ride is not yet over. What’s causing it this time? Fortunately, it is not fraud or wrongdoing creating the turbulence. Instead, three factors external to the business of trading, mining, or exchanging digital assets are at work.
Background
On Thursday, August 17, and accelerating on August 18, the largest cryptocurrencies dropped precipitously. Bitcoin even broke down and fell below the psychologically important $26,000 US dollar price level before bouncing. While some are pointing to CME options expiration on the third Friday of each month, most are pointing to a Wall Street Journal article, and blaming Elon Musk, as the reason the asset class was nudged off a small cliff. There are other less highlighted, but important, catalysts that added to the flash-crash; these, along with the WSJ story, will be explained below.
Smells like Musk
What could SpaceX, the company owned and run by Elon Musk, possibly have to do with a crypto selloff? On Thursday, the crypto market had a downward spike around 5 PM ET. It was just after the Wall Street Journal revealed a change in the accounting valuation of SpaceX’s crypto assets. Reportedly, SpaceX marked down the value of its bitcoin assets by a substantial $373 million over the past two years. Additionally, the company has executed on crypto asset divestitures as well. When the reduction took place is uncertain, but cryptocurrency holdings have been reduced both in terms of the amount of coins and the value each coin is held for on the books.
Elon Musk’s reputation is that of a forward thinker, and one that embraces, if not leads, technology. He has significant influence over cryptocurrency valuations, often instigating pronounced market fluctuations brought about by Musk’s influential posts on his social media company, X. The reduction coincides with a similar crypto reduction on the books of publicly held, Musk-led, Tesla (TSLA). The electric car manufacturer had previously disclosed in its annual earnings report that it had liquidated 75% of its bitcoin reserves.
While it should not be surprising that two companies stepped away from speculation on something unrelated to their business or lowered support for the still young blockchain technology, it gave a reason for a reaction to this and other festering dynamics.
Wary of Gary
The Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Gary Gensler, is viewed as a “Whack-a Mole” to crypto stakeholders that prefer more autonomy than regulation. Every time the SEC gets knocked down as a potential regulator, it resurfaces, and crypto businesses have to deal with the agency again.
Last month, Judge Analisa Torres made a pivotal decision in a case involving payment company Ripple Labs and the Commission. Her verdict declared that a substantial portion of sales of the token XRP did not fall under the category of securities transactions. The SEC claimed it was a security. This judgement was hailed as a triumph for the crypto sector and catalyzed an impressive 20% uptick in the exchange Coinbase’s stock in a single day.
On the same Thursday as the WSJ article, the SEC showed its face again with a strong response to the earlier ruling. Judge Torres allowed the SEC’s request for an “interlocutory” appeal on her ruling. This process will involve the SEC presenting its motion, followed by Ripple’s counterarguments. This is slated to continue until mid-September. Afterward, the Judge will determine whether the agency can effectively challenge her token classification ruling in an appellate court.
The still young asset class, its exchange methods, valuation, and usage techniques, once they are more clearly defined, will serve to add stability and reduce risk and shocks in crypto and the surrounding businesses. The longer the legal system and regulatory entities take, including Congress, the longer it will take for cryptocurrencies to find the more settled mainstream place in the markets they desire.
Rate Spate
The eighteen-month-long spate of rate hikes in the U.S. and across the globe is providing an alternative investment choice instead of what are viewed as riskier assets. Coincidentally, again on Thursday, August 17, the ten-year US Treasury Note hit a yield higher than the markets have experienced in 12 years. At 4.31%, investors can lock in a known annual return for ten years that exceeds the current and projected inflation rate.
Take Away
The volatility in the crypto asset class has been dramatic – not for the weak-stomached investor. On the same day in August, three unrelated events together helped cause the asset class to spike down. These include an article in a top business news publication indicating that one of the world’s most recognized cryptocurrency advocates has reduced bitcoin’s exposure to his companies. The SEC being granted a rematch in a landmark case that it had recently lost, where the earlier outcome gave no provision for the SEC to treat cryptocurrencies like a security. And rounding out the triad of events on crypto’s throttleback Thursday, yields are up across the curve to levels not seen in a dozen years. Investor’s seeking a place to reduce risk can now provide themselves with interest payments in excess of inflation.
But despite the ups and downs, bitcoin is up 56.7% year-to-date, 11.1% over the past 12 months, 110.5% over three years, 300% over five years, and astronomical amounts over longer periods. Related companies like bitcoin miners, crypto exchanges, and blockchain companies have also experienced growth similar to that found in few other industries over the past decade.
The SEC May be Poised to Become more Accommodating to Cryptocurrency
In what is being reported as a developing story that can significantly impact securities and crypto regulation, rumors are circulating that SEC Chair Gary Gensler may be on the way out as head of the agency. The reports are pointing to Hester Pierce as the most likely person to replace him. How would this impact public markets and the future state of cryptocurrency regulation? We discuss these questions and thoughts below.
Background
Whale (@whalechart) is a crypto news provider with an account on the microblogging platform X. It is widely respected, with 363,000 followers. Whale announced this morning (August 14), “SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce is being considered to replace Gary Gensler as the head of the regulatory agency.” This small post (or tweet) has triggered waves of speculation about the upcoming course of securities regulation for both registered products and cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin.
Ms. Peirce is known for her strong support of innovation and outside-the-box thinking. She has been a commissioner of the SEC since 2018, appointed by President Trump. Pierce is a former academic and lawyer who has specialized in securities law and financial regulation. She is known for her views on the regulation of cryptocurrencies and other emerging technologies.
What the SEC May Look Like Under Hester Pierce
Peirce, who has a reputation as being pro-innovation, has been a bold advocate for embracing disruptive technologies like cryptocurrencies and blockchain. If the rumors are accurate and she does find her way to the position of top securities cop, it could signal a shift towards a more accommodating regulatory stance, with a leader whose thoughts on fintech and digital assets are known.
If the days are indeed numbered for the SEC’s current head Gary Gensler, the traditional and digital asset markets would mainly view this as a positive. President Biden’s appointee, Gary Gensler, has been a catalyst behind the intensified scrutiny and rule-making within the overall cryptocurrency realm. His time in the position has led the SEC’s tightening its grip on digital asset exchanges and clamping down on many Initial Coin Offerings (ICOs).
Gensler has been acting to protect consumers, but many critics argue that the SEC under his lead, has been led to too much interference in free markets. With Peirce potentially in the drivers seat, the probability of the regulator embracing crypto assets in a less restrictive way increases dramatically.
Those impacted the most by a changed SEC head have weighed in already with diverse ideologies and opinions. Advocates assert that her penchant for innovation could sow the seeds for heightened financial growth. They contend that a friendlier regulatory outlook might be the medicine needed to embolden new ideas and investors to explore new opportunities – this, they say, could give the economy a lift.
Those opposed to a Hester Peirce nomination warn against a looser regulatory environment that could leave investors exposed to heightened risks. Their call is for the SEC to remain a vigilant guardian of investor interests, standing as a wall against potential deceit or market manipulation.
As the news regarding Peirce’s probable elevation continues to spread on social media and in articles like this, the pressing question many market participants are trying to discern is, will the SEC take a gentler road to new tech innovations or will it hold overly tight to its role concerning investor safety? If the change happens, there could be a celebratory bump in the value of crypto assets and others.
The crypto-unit bitcoin holds out the prospect of something revolutionary: money created in the free market, money the production and use of which the state has no access to. The transactions carried out with it are anonymous; outsiders do not know who paid and who received the payment. It would be money that cannot be multiplied at will, whose quantity is finite, that knows no national borders, and that can be used unhindered worldwide. This is possible because the bitcoin is based on a special form of electronic data processing and storage: blockchain technology (a “distributed ledger technology,” DLT), which can also be described as a decentralized account book.
Think through the consequences if such a “denationalized” form of money should actually prevail in practice. The state can no longer tax its citizens as before. It lacks information on the labor and capital incomes of citizens and enterprises and their total wealth. The only option left to the state is to tax the assets in the “real world”—such as houses, land, works of art, etc. But this is costly and expensive. It could try to levy a “poll tax”: a tax in which everyone pays the same absolute tax amount—regardless of the personal circumstances of the taxpayers, such as income, wealth, ability, to achieve and so on. But would that be practicable? Could it be enforced? This is doubtful.
The state could also no longer simply borrow money. In a cryptocurrency world, who would give credit to the state? The state would have to justify the expectation that it would use the borrowed money productively to service its debt. But as we know, the state is not in a position to do this or is in a much worse position than private companies. So even if the state could obtain credit, it would have to pay a comparatively high interest rate, severely restricting its scope for credit financing.
In view of the financial disempowerment of the state by a cryptocurrency, the question arises: Could the state as we know it today still exist at all, could it still mobilize enough supporters and gather them behind it? After all, the fantasies of redistribution and enrichment that today drive many people as voters into the arms of political parties and ideologies would disappear into thin air. The state would no longer function as a redistribution machine; it basically would have little or no money to finance political promises. Cryptocurrencies therefore have the potential to herald the end of the state as we know it today.
The transition from the national fiat currencies to a cryptocurrency created in the free market has, above all, consequences for the existing fiat monetary system and the production and employment structure it has created. Suppose a cryptocurrency (C) rises in the favor of money demanders. It is increasingly in demand and therefore appreciates against the established fiat currency (F). If the prices of goods, calculated in F, remain unchanged, the holder of C records an increase in his purchasing power: one obtains more F for C and can purchase more goods, provided that the prices of goods, calculated in F, remain unchanged.
Since C has now appreciated compared to F, the prices of the goods expressed in F must also rise sooner or later—otherwise the holder of C could arbitrate by exchanging C for F and then paying the prices of the goods labeled in F. And because more and more people want to use C as money, goods prices will soon be labeled not only in F, but also in C. When money users increasingly turn away from F because they see C as the better money, the purchasing power devaluation of F continues. Because F is an unbacked currency, in extreme cases it can lose its purchasing power and become a total loss.
The decline in the purchasing power of F will have far-reaching consequences for the production and employment structure of the economy. It leads to an increase in market interest rates for loans denominated in F. Investments that have so far seemed profitable turn out to be a flop. Companies cut jobs. Debtors whose loans become due have problems obtaining follow-up loans and become insolvent. The boom provided by the fiat currencies collapses and turns into a bust. If the central banks accompany this bust with an expansion of the money supply, the exchange rate of the fiat currencies against the cryptocurrency will fall even further. The purchasing power of the sight, time, and savings deposits and bonds denominated in fiat currencies would be lost; in the event of loan defaults, creditors could only hope to be (partially) compensated by the collateral values, if any.
However, the bitcoin has not yet developed to the point where it could be a perfect substitute for the fiat currencies. For example, the performance of the bitcoin network is not yet large enough. At present, it is operating at full capacity when it processes around 360,000 payments per day. In Germany alone, however, around 75 million transfers are made in one working day! Another problem with bitcoin transactions is finality. In modern fiat cash payment systems, there is a clearly identifiable point in time at which a payment is legally and de facto completed, and from that point on the money transferred can be used immediately. However, DLT consensus techniques (such as proof of work) only allow relative finality, and this is undoubtedly detrimental to the money user (because blocks added to the blockchain can subsequently become invalid by resolving forks).
The transaction costs are also of great importance regarding whether the bitcoin can assert itself as a universally used means of payment. In the recent past, there have been some major fluctuations in this area: In mid-June 2019, a transaction cost about $4.10, in December 2017 it peaked at more than $37, but in the meantime for many months it had been only $0.07. In addition, the time taken to process a transaction had also fluctuated considerably at times, which may be disadvantageous from the point of view of bitcoin users in view of the emergence of instant payment for fiat cash payments.
Another important aspect is the question of the “intermediary.” Bitcoin is designed to enable intermediary-free transactions between participants. But do the market participants really want intermediary–free money? What if there are problems? For example, if someone made a mistake and transferred one hundred bitcoins instead of one, he cannot reverse the transaction. And nobody can help him! The fact that many hold their bitcoins in trading venues and not in their private digital wallets suggests that even in a world of cryptocurrencies there is a demand for intermediaries offering services such as storage and security of private keys.
However, as soon as intermediaries come into play, the transaction chain is no longer limited to the digital world, but reaches the real world. At the interface between the digital and the real world, a trustworthy entity is required. Just think of credit transactions. They cannot be performed unseen (trustless) and anonymously. Payment defaults can happen here, and therefore the lender wants to know who the borrower is, what credit quality he has, what collateral he provides. And if the bridge is built from the digital to the real world, the crypto-money inevitably finds itself in the crosshairs of the state. However, this bridge will ultimately be necessary, because in modern economies with a division of labor, money must have the capacity for intermediation.
It is safe to assume that technology will continue to make progress, that it will remove many remaining obstacles. However, it can also be expected that the state will make every effort to discourage a free market for money, for example, by reducing the competitiveness of alternative money media such as precious metals and crypto-units vis-à-vis fiat money through tax measures (such as turnover and capital gains taxes). As long as this is the case, it will be difficult even for money that is better in all other respects to assert itself.
Therefore, technical superiority alone will probably not be sufficient to help free market money—whether in the form of gold, silver, or crypto-units—achieve a breakthrough. In addition, and above all, it will be necessary for people to demand their right to self-determination in the choice of money or to recognize the need to make use of it. Ludwig von Mises has cited the “sound-money principle” in this context: “[T]he sound-money principle has two aspects. It is affirmative in approving the market’s choice of a commonly used medium of exchange. It is negative in obstructing the government’s propensity to meddle with the currency system.” And he continues: “It is impossible to grasp the meaning of the idea of sound money if one does not realize that it was devised as an instrument for the protection of civil liberties against despotic inroads on the part of governments. Ideologically it belongs in the same class with political constitutions and bills of rights.”
These words make it clear that in order for a free market for money to become at all possible, quite a substantial change must take place in people’s minds. We must turn away from democratic socialism, from all socialist-collectivist false doctrines, from their state-glorifying delusion, no longer listen to socialist appeals to envy and resentment. This can only be achieved through better insight, acceptance of better ideas and logical thinking. Admittedly, this is a difficult undertaking, but it is not hopeless. Especially since there is a logical alternative to democratic socialism: the private law society with a free market for money. What this means is outlined in the final chapter of this book.
About the Author:
Dr. Thorsten Polleit is Chief Economist of Degussa and Honorary Professor at the University of Bayreuth. He also acts as an investment advisor.
Worldcoin Crypto Project Launched by OpenAI’s Sam Altman
In a revolutionary move, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman began rolling out Worldcoin on July 24. The cryptocurrency project aims to reinvent the way the world identifies living, breathing humans compared to AI bots. The core offering of Worldcoin is its innovative World ID, often described as a “digital passport” that serves as proof of a person’s human identity. But that is just the beginning of the project goals.
To obtain a World ID, users must undergo an in-person iris scan using Worldcoin’s revolutionary ‘orb.’ This silver ball, about the size of a bowling ball, ensures the legitimacy of the individual’s identity, subsequently creating the unique World ID.
The brains behind this revolutionary project are the San Francisco and Berlin-based organization, Tools for Humanity. During its beta phase, the project amassed an impressive 2 million users, and with the official launch on Monday, Worldcoin is rapidly expanding its ‘orbing’ operations to 35 cities across 20 countries.
In select countries, early adopters will be rewarded with Worldcoin’s own cryptocurrency token, WLD. This incentive has already driven WLD’s price to soar after the announcement. On Binance, the world’s largest, WLD reached a peak price of $5.29 and continued to trade at $2.49 (from an initial starting price of $0.15) as of 11:00 AM ET. Notably, the trading volume on Binance has reached a staggering $25.1 million.
The Role of Blockchain
Blockchains play a crucial role in this project, as they securely store World IDs while preserving user privacy and preventing any single entity from controlling or shutting down the system, according to co-founder Alex Blania.
One key application of World IDs is its ability to distinguish between real individuals and AI bots in the age of generative AI chatbots like ChatGPT, which are adept at mimicking human language. By leveraging World IDs, online platforms can effectively combat the infiltration of AI bots into human interactions.
Economic Implications of AI
Altman emphasized the economic implications of AI, stating that people will be profoundly impacted by AI’s capabilities. “People will be supercharged by AI, which will have massive economic implications,” he said.
One interesting example of what Altman believes AI can eventually provide is universal basic income (UBI), a social benefits program aimed at providing financial support to every individual. According to Altman, as AI gradually takes over many human tasks, UBI can play a vital role in mitigating income inequality. Since World IDs are exclusive to genuine human beings, they can act as a safeguard against fraud in UBI distributions.
Though Altman acknowledged that a world with widespread UBI is likely in the distant future and the logistics of such a system are still unclear, he believes that Worldcoin paves the way for experiments and solutions to tackle this societal challenge.
The launch of Worldcoin marks a significant step in the convergence of cryptocurrency and AI technologies, with potential far-reaching effects on how we identify ourselves and interact in the digital age. As the project gains momentum, financial market professionals should closely monitor the developments surrounding Worldcoin and its impact on the future of money.
The cryptocurrency developer Ripple Labs just won a legal victory against the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) that should provoke cheers from the entire industry, at least those that prefer that digital currency not be treated as a security. If crypto is not viewed as a security, the jurisdiction which the SEC has been pushing hard to cement, may fall apart. This ruling may eventually lead to any future legal framework for digital tokens being designed by the U.S. Congress.
Background
Ripple is a technology company that uses cryptocurrency and blockchain technology to offer financial solutions. Ripple and XRP are two distinct entities. Ripple is a fintech company that builds global payment systems, while XRP is an independent digital asset that can be used by anyone for a variety of reasons.
In 2020, Ripple was charged by the SEC on the grounds that the company illegally raised $1.38 billion in unregistered securities offerings. In a ruling on July 13 of this year, it was decided by a Federal court that Ripple Labs did not violate securities law by selling its XRP tokens on its exchange. This is being seen as the first major setback for the SEC in a decade of enforcement against the cryptocurrency industry. Other crypto firms accused of illegally operating digital asset exchanges can now explore ways to take advantage of the ruling.
This is an important decision that may alter the expected path of the entire industry. The SEC and the cryptocurrency industry which includes exchanges, crypto-mining, and the tokens themselves, have been at odds, with increasing heat on the industry, mainly by the SEC. Gary Gensler, who chairs the SEC, has described the crypto market as a “Wild West” riddled with fraud. He claims that most crypto tokens are securities. The regulator has been cracking down on crypto exchanges, including the top U.S. exchange Coinbase. If crypto is considered a security, it will fall under the commission’s oversight.
What this Means for the Crypto Industry
Crypto firms have long disputed the SEC’s jurisdiction but until last week had no supporting precedence from a court. This win provides much needed ammunition for the industry to reassert its claims.
U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres in New York ruled that sales on public cryptocurrency exchanges were not offers of securities because purchasers did not have a reasonable expectation of profit that depended on anything Ripple did. This profit expectation was used as a key in determining if XRP was a security at the time.
Crypto supporters are viewing the decision as a watershed and the judge’s reasoning as a new line of defense for the others being targeted by the SEC, such as Coinbase, Binance, and Bittrex.
SEC APPEAL?
It remains to be seen whether the SEC will challenge the ruling in the 2nd U.S. Court of Appeals which could cause judges to delay hearing other pending and new cases that other crypto assets sold on exchanges are not securities.
Ripple Chief Legal Officer Stuart Alderoty said in an interview with Reuters that the company “wouldn’t shy away from an appeal, because the judge was right on her core findings,” adding: “I believe any appellate court looking at this would amplify and endorse those rulings, which would certainly be welcome.”
An appeal is somewhat risky for the SEC. If the 2nd Circuit, whose rulings are binding on federal courts in New York, Connecticut and Vermont, adopts the logic in the Ripple ruling, other cases like the SEC vs. Coinbase case would leave the SEC without much of an argument. This could permanently eliminate any claim the Commission has to regulation over the industry.
With the district court having taken a sledgehammer to the main claim the SEC had to oversight, the industry may find itself subject to a legislative agreement. Especially with an SEC deprived of the argument that their legal cases were sound, there’s nothing to stop an acceleration of efforts to find a bipartisan agreement on a regulatory framework for crypto assets by the legislative branch.
“Proclaim Liberty” from Melania Trump’s new NFT releases ($50.00)
NFT Investments Benefit from Increased Activity
Do you remember Beeple? He’s the graphic artist who kicked off the non-fungible token (NFT) frenzy. More important than starting an NFT gold rush, the $69.3 million his piece auctioned for alerted many investors and businesspeople to other uses of tokens and blockchain technology beyond cryptocurrency. While the frenzy has simmered, the blockchain-reliant art form is still finding its place. Melania Trump, who owns an NFT company, released a freedom-themed collection in time for America’s birthday. The Ethereum based tokens will be watched closely, compared in price to previous releases, and may help rejuvenate some lost enthusiasm for NFT art.
Background
Non-fungible tokens are unique digital assets stored on a blockchain. Beyond art, NFTs can represent medical records, shipping records, music, videos, and can be adapted to most transactions that benefit from proof of something occurring. In art, the technology allows creators to monetize their digital creations and provide collectors with a method to own and invest in unique digital assets.
As with most art, value is subjective. As with any investment that is new, wild swings can be expected as a market value will be determined by the few initially involved. And these will include those that are extremely bullish and bid up prices, those that know that new thinly traded markets can be elevated by hype, and those that serve as the opposite of hype, they are openly negative on anything new or different. NFTs are no different – for example, nothing has yet openly sold for as much as Beeple’s piece.
Melania’s Place in the NFT Market
In December 2021, Melania Trump, less than one year out of the White House as First Lady, began her own NFT art provider. The themes have been beauty and patriotism and have been popular among collectors. However, since then, the prices of pieces sold and then resold have fluctuated widely in a market that has lost the world’s attention, and is far from maturity.
The Current NFT Release
Some say Melania Knavs, born in communist Slovenia, has gotten to live “the American Dream,” and can appreciate it more than most. Others say Melania Trump understands how capitalism works and is using it to make a buck off of her famous name. As it relates to NFTs, investors should probably focus most on the truth that Melania has brought attention back to this market and investors in NFTs themselves, or the blockchain technology that supports it, benefit. After all, anytime there is an increase of buyers and sellers in a marketplace, liquidity rises, and prices become more rational.
One week before USA Independence Day on July 4, the former first lady announced she is selling “The 1776 Collection,” a tranche of three thousand digital tokens priced at $50 each. Investors are asked to use their digital wallets or more traditional methods, including a credit card, to purchase digital creations.
Image: On December 16, 2021, @MELANIATRUMP tweeted this announcement.
Previous releases included the “Trump Digital Trading Cards” collection, which featured cartoonish images of the former president in unlikely scenarios, like standing on the moon. Her first edition of her collection generated more than 14,200 ETH ($26.3 million) in trading activity so far in 2023. The second edition has generated about $2.7 million over the same period.
NFT Investor’s Dream
The presence of high profile people are good for the maturation of the NFT market, and Melania Trump’s name certainly has been attached to NFT art. At the release of her third and latest collection, her June 29 announcement proclaimed it gives “collectors the ability to celebrate our nation’s independence while acknowledging America’s Founding Fathers’ vision of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.” The announcement explained that “Each collectible represents an aspect of Americana and was deliberately designed to acknowledge the foundations of American ideals.”
