Washington DC Law Firm that Won Operation Choke Hold Suit, Gives Congress Advice
Are private digital assets, under unlawful attack by regulators? Sounds conspiratorial, but a D.C. law firm that successfully sued the FDIC, Federal Reserve, and Office of the Controller of the Currency (OCC), says they are doing just that. The firm Cooper & Kirk, won a large lawsuit dubbed against the agencies for their part in, “Operation Choke Point.” That was a decade ago, the law firm now claims they have uncovered a coordinated campaign by bank regulators to drive crypto out of the U.S. financial system.
The new “Operation Choke Point 2.0,” according to the firms website, “have published informal guidance documents that single out cryptocurrency and cryptocurrency customers as a risk to the banking system.” According to an informational paper published by the D.C. firm, “businesses in the cryptocurrency marketplace are losing their bank accounts, or their access to the ACH network, suddenly, and with no explanation from their bankers, the paper continued, “the owners and employees of cryptocurrency firms are even having their personal accounts closed without explanation.”
As an example of could be viewed as overstepping their charters, the firm pointed out that, “over the past two weeks, federal regulators have shut down a solvent bank that was known to be serving the crypto industry and, although it is required to resolve banks through the “least cost resolution” to the Deposit Insurance Fund, the FDIC chose to shutter rather than sell the part of the bank that serves digital asset customers, costing the Fund billions of dollars.” The overall theme of the 37 page paper is that the targeting of certain businesses is going on to force them out of existence.
Depriving businesses of their constitutional right to due process. This is a fifth amendment right that says that an entity tagging another with a derogatory label that causes injury (like lose bank accounts) The firm accuses that this is what the regulators have done by “labeling crypto a threat to the financial system.”
Violating both the non-delegation and anticommandeering doctrine by, “depriving Americans of Key Structural constitutional protections against the arbitrary exercise of government power.”
Refusing to perform their non-discretionary duties “when doing so will benefit the cryptocurrency industry.”
Evading rules that require periods of notice and comment of the rulemaking requirements of the administrative procedure act. It claims circumventing this is, “undemocratic.”
Acting in an arbitrary and capricious fashion by avoiding explaining underlying rules for their decisions. “It is difficult to imagine a more arbitrary and capricious agency action that simultaneously placing a solvent bank into receivership solely because it provided financial services to the cypto industry, while permitting insolvent institutions not tied to the crypto industry to continue operations.”
What is the Law Firms Stated Intent
Cooper and Kirk urge the U.S. Congress to perform its role and hold the agencies accountable. The firm urges the Congress to ask for all communications records related to these matters from the regulators.
The firm also would like for them to explain the basis for their conclusion that safety and soundness of the banking system requires the banking system be insulated from crypto. They would also like for it to be made clear to the agencies that the comment period of the Administrative procedure act is mandatory. It wanst an investigation into why Signature Bank was closed.
The last stated hope is fro Congress to investigate whether bank regulators are working to squelch innovation from the private sector in order to clear out competition for the benefit of existing regulated banks and a new federal crypto asset.
Take Away
Just like the first Operation Choke Point was targeting specific players, the new version does the same. The law firms stops short of any threats in their open paper, but it makes clear that the firm has solid experience achieving compliance if these maters.
The Details of the Hindenberg Research Report Include Serious Allegations
A legal face-off may be brewing as Block (SQ), the other company co-founded by Jack Dorsey, calls on the SEC for what Block calls an “inaccurate report.” The report Block (formerly Square) is referring to was released by Hindenberg Research on March 23. The research contends that Dorsey’s fintech company showed, “willingness to facilitate fraud against consumers and the government, avoid regulation, dress up predatory loans and fees as revolutionary technology, and mislead investors with inflated metrics.”
What is each side claiming, and what is the responsibility in releasing a report that may take Hindenberg into a fight with a company with a $44 billion market cap?
Who’s Involved?
Block is a financial technology company specializing in mobile payments founded in 2009 by Jack Dorsey and Jim McKelvey. The company’s flagship product is a small, square-shaped credit card reader that plugs into a smartphone or tablet and allows businesses to accept credit and debit card payments. Block has added other financial products and services, including point-of-sale software, payroll processing, and business loans.
Hindenburg Research provides investors with investigative research and analysis for the purpose of helping them identify potential risks or fraudulent practices in publicly traded companies. They are described as a short-selling, research-based firm. The Research is often considered within the context of its short-position investment strategy.
Image: Block’s flagship product – Nat’l Museum of American History Smithsonian Institution (Flickr)
What is Hindenberg’s Claim?
The research firm with a reputation of looking below the surface for trouble at firms, says Block is not what it claims to be. According to the Hindenberg report, the Dorsey-founded firm claims to have developed a frictionless and magical financial technology. The mission of this technology, the report quotes Block as saying is to empower the “unbanked” and the “underbanked.”
Hindenberg says that over two years of investigation that involved dozens of interviews with former employees that Block has systematically taken advantage of the demographics it claims to be helping. This refers to the stated mission of helping the underbanked. Instead, the research firm says this stands in conflict with, “the company’s willingness to facilitate fraud against consumers and the government, avoid regulation, and dress up predatory loans and fees as revolutionary technology, and mislead investors with inflated metrics.”
The two years of investigation also indicated that Block severely overstated its user counts and has understated its customer acquisition costs. This information, the report says, is based on former employees’ estimation that 40%-75% of accounts they reviewed were fake, involved in fraud, or were additional accounts tied to a single individual.
They claim a key metric that investors use to value the company are unclear. That is, how many individuals are on the Cash App. The report accuses the company reporting of misleading “transacting active” metrics filled with fake and duplicate accounts. Hindenberg says, “Block can and should clarify to investors an estimate on how many unique people actually use Cash App.”
Hindenberg said the app is used for illegal activity and points to all the rap songs written about engaging in illegal activity, activity made possible with the help of the app. The research company even made a compilation video to demonstrate this point (link to video under “Sources” below).
A line in one of the songs is, “I paid them hitters through Cash App.” Heritage contests that Block paid to promote the video for the song called “Cash App” which described paying contract killers through the app. The song’s artist was later arrested for attempted murder.
According to the Hindenberg report, Block’s Cash App was also cited “by far” as the top app used in reported U.S. sex trafficking, according to a leading non-profit organization. Multiple Department of Justice complaints outline how Cash App has been used to facilitate sex trafficking, including sex trafficking of minors.
Beyond alleged facilitation of payment for crimes, the platform, former employees contend, is overrun with scam accounts and fake users. Examples of obvious distortions of user numbers is that “Jack Dorsey” has multiple fake accounts, including some that appear aimed at scamming Cash App users. “Elon Musk” and “Donald Trump” who have dozens of accounts in their names. Hindenberg contends they tested this flaw, “we ordered a Cash Card under our obviously fake Donald Trump account, checking to see if Cash App’s compliance would take issue—the card promptly arrived in the mail,” they gave as an example.
Block’s Response
Not to be dissed, management at Block called out the threatening press release. “We intend to work with the SEC and explore legal action against Hindenburg Research for the factually inaccurate and misleading report they shared about our Cash App business today.”
The Dorsey founded firm suggested that the research firm wrote the report for dubious reasons and that it may be part of an orchestrated reverse pump and dump, “Hindenburg is known for these types of attacks, which are designed solely to allow short sellers to profit from a declined stock price. We have reviewed the full report in the context of our own data and believe it’s designed to deceive and confuse investors.”
The company than comforted stakeholders saying, “we are a highly regulated public company with regular disclosures, and are confident in our products, reporting, compliance programs, and controls. We will not be distracted by typical short seller tactics.”
There’s Smoke, is There Fire?
Are the initial disparaging claims against Block’s business accurate? Is there merit to what Block says of Hindenberg Research? As Block may be seeking a legal remedy, it is unlikely that either party will be very vocal from here.
For investors, it’s logical that both parties cannot be right at the same time. One of the parties is overstating truth. If Block is indeed working with the SEC, this truth should eventually surface.
The Evolution of Blockchain Includes the Less Heralded DAO
Less talked about creations that can only exist with blockchain technology are Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAO). This is an organization that operates autonomously on a blockchain network, using smart contracts to execute its functions. While a famous Ether hack gave DAO’s a figurative black-eye a few years back, the defi organizations exists and new purposes, and with that new challenges as well.
What is a DAO?
A Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO) is a type of organization that is run by smart contracts on a blockchain network rather than a centralized authority. In a DAO, the rules and regulations are encoded in computer code, which is executed automatically by the blockchain network. This means that decisions are made through a decentralized voting process rather than being controlled by a central authority.
DAOs are not controlled by any single entity or individual but rather by a distributed network of users. The DAO will self-execute on rules and directives encoded in the blockchain. All of these decisions and transactions made within a DAO are recorded on a public blockchain, this is designed to make them transparent and auditable.
DAOs can be used for a wide range of applications, including governance, finance, and decentralized applications (DApps). They offer a way for communities to come together and govern themselves in a decentralized and transparent way, without the need for a centralized authority.
The Purpose of a DAO
The purpose of a DAO is to provide a trusted method of organizing and managing a group of people, without the need for a centralized authority. DAOs are designed to be self-governing, transparent, and autonomous. They enable members to collaborate on a common goal, make decisions through a democratic process, and manage resources in a decentralized way. DAOs are often used for fundraising, investing, and community-driven projects.
Examples of DAOs
One of the most well-known examples of a DAO is The DAO, which was launched in 2016. The DAO was a decentralized investment fund that raised $150 million in Ether (the cryptocurrency of the Ethereum network). Unfortunately, The DAO was hacked shortly after its launch, leading to the loss of millions of dollars. This event highlighted the potential risks associated with DAOs and the need for proper security measures.
A more successful example of a DAO is MakerDAO, which is a decentralized lending platform that uses a stablecoin called DAI. MakerDAO enables users to borrow and lend cryptocurrency without the need for a centralized authority. It operates autonomously through a set of smart contracts that are stored on the Ethereum blockchain network.
Who Uses DAOs?
DAOs are typically used by communities, organizations, and individuals such as Decentralized Finance (DeFi). The Defi projects use DAOs to govern the platform and make decisions about its future path and development.
Some gaming communities have used DAOs to manage in-game assets and govern the community. Social media outlets have chosen decentralization and implement a DAO social media platforms use govern the platform and make decisions about content moderation and platform development.
Are DAOs Legal and Safe?
Regarding the safety and legality of DAOs, they can be safe and legal if designed and implemented correctly. However, like any technology, there are risks associated with DAOs, including the potential for hacking and exploitation of smart contracts.
The legality of DAOs depends on the jurisdiction and the specific nature of the DAO. In some countries, there may be regulatory frameworks that apply to DAOs, while in others they may not be explicitly recognized. In general, the local law applies to the DAO. Those that engage in illegal activities or violate securities laws can be subject to legal action. Regulations specifically applicable to this new technological format are subject to revision.
Take Away
Blockchain technology has grown and evolved since the creation of the first DAO, simply called, The DAO, in 2016. The development of new blockchain platforms and smart contract languages has made it easier to create and operate DAOs, and there are now many different types of DAOs being developed for various use cases. The security of blockchain technology has also improved and expanded adoption and adaptation to different groups will rely on the trust of the technology to shield itself from outside harm.
Is the Fed Doing Too Much, Not Enough, or Just Right?
The Fed Reserve Chair Jerome Powell has an ongoing credibility problem. The problem is that markets, economists, and now Congress find him extremely credible. So credible that they have already declared him a winner fighting inflation, or of more pertinence, the economy a loser because Powell and the Fed policymakers have been so resolute in their fight against the rising cost of goods and services that soon there will be an abundance of newly unemployed, businesses will falter, and the stock market will be left in tatters. This view that he has already done too much and that the economy has been overkilled, even while it shows remarkable strength, was echoed many times during his visit to Capital Hill for his twice a year testimony.
“As of the end of December, there were 1.9 job openings for each unemployed individual, close to the all-time peak recorded last March, while unemployment insurance claims have remained near historic lows.” – Federal Reserve Chair Jay Powell (March 8, 2023).
Powell’s Address
Perhaps the most influential individual on financial markets in the U.S. and around the world, Fed Chair Powell continued his hawkish (inflation fighter, interest rate hiker) tone at his Senate and House testimonies. The overall message was; inflation is bad, inflation has been persistent, we will continue on the path to bring it down, also employment is incredibly strong, the employment situation is such that we can do more, we will do more to protect the U.S. economy from the ravages of inflation.
Powell began, “My colleagues and I are acutely aware that high inflation is causing significant hardship, and we are strongly committed to returning inflation to our 2 percent goal.” Powell discussed the forceful actions taken to date and added, “we have more work to do. Our policy actions are guided by our dual mandate to promote maximum employment and stable prices. Without price stability, the economy does not work for anyone. In particular, without price stability, we will not achieve a sustained period of labor market conditions that benefit all.”
Powell discussed the slowed growth last year; there were two periods of negative GDP growth reported during the first two quarters. He mentioned how the once red-hot housing sector is weakening under higher interest rates and that “Higher interest rates and slower output growth also appear to be weighing on business fixed investment.” He then discussed the impact on labor markets, “Despite the slowdown in growth, the labor market remains extremely tight. The unemployment rate was 3.4 percent in January, its lowest level since 1969. Job gains remained very strong in January, while the supply of labor has continued to lag.1 As of the end of December, there were 1.9 job openings for each unemployed individual, close to the all-time peak recorded last March, while unemployment insurance claims have remained near historic lows.”
On the subject of monetary policy, the head of the Federal Reserve mentioned that the target of 2% inflation has not been met and that recent numbers have it moving in the wrong direction. Powell also discussed that the Fed had raised short-term interest rates by adding 4.50%. He suggested that recent economic numbers require that an increase to where the sufficient height of fed funds peaks is likely higher than previously thought. All the while, he added, “we are continuing the process of significantly reducing the size of our balance sheet.”
Powell acknowledged some headway, “We are seeing the effects of our policy actions on demand in the most interest-sensitive sectors of the economy. It will take time, however, for the full effects of monetary restraint to be realized, especially on inflation. In light of the cumulative tightening of monetary policy and the lags with which monetary policy affects economic activity and inflation, the Committee slowed the pace of interest rate increases over its past two meetings.” Powell added, “We will continue to make our decisions meeting by meeting, taking into account the totality of incoming data and their implications for the outlook for economic activity and inflation.”
Questions and Answers
Congressmen both in the Senate and the House use the Semiannual Monetary Policy Report to Congress (formerly known as Humphrey Hawkins Testimony) to ask questions of the person with the most economic insight in Washington. Often their questions have already been covered in the Chair’s opening address, but Congresspeople will ask anyway to show their constituents at home that they are looking after them.
Elizabeth Warren is on the Senate Banking Committee; her math concluded the result of even a 1% increase in unemployment is a two million-worker job loss. Warren asked Powell, “Do you call laying off two million people this year not a sharp increase in unemployment?” “Explain that to the two million families who are going to be out of work.” In his response, Powell went back to historical numbers and reminded the Senator that an increase in unemployment would still rank the current economy above what Americans have lived through in most of our lifetimes, “We’re not, again, we’re not targeting any of that. But I would say even 4.5 percent unemployment is well better than most of the time for the last, you know, 75 years,” Chair Powell answered.
U.S. House Financial Services Committee on Wednesday heard Congressman Frank Lucas concerned about the pressure for the Fed to include climate concerns as an additional Fed mandate. Lucas from Oklahoma asked, “How careful are you in ensuring that the Fed does not place itself into the climate debate, and how can Congress ensure that the Fed’s regulatory tool kit is not warped into creating policy outcomes?” Powell answered that the Fed has a narrow but real role involving bank supervision. It’s important that individual banks understand and can manage over time their risks from any climate change and it’s impact on business and the economy. He wants to make sure the Fed never assumes a role where they are becoming a climate policymaker.
Other non-policy questions included Central Bank Digital Currencies. House Congressman Steven Lynch showed concerns that the Fed was experimenting with digital currencies. His question concerned receiving a public update on where they are with their partnership with MIT, their testing, and what they are trying to accomplish. Powell’s response seemed to satisfy the Congressman. “we engage with the public on an ongoing basis, we are also doing research on policy, and also technology,” said Powell. Follow-up questions on the architecture of a CBDC, were met with responses that indicated that the Fed, they are not at the stage of making decisions, instead, they are experimenting and learning. “How would this work, does it work, what is the best technology, what’s the most efficient.” Powell emphasized that the U.S. Federal Reserve is at an early stage, but making technological progress. They have not decided from a policy perspective if this is something that the country needs or desires.
Issues at Stake
As it relates to the stock and bond markets, the Fed has been holding overnight interest rates at a level that is more than one percentage point below the rate of inflation. The reality of this situation is that investors and savers that are earning near the Fed Funds rate on their deposits are losing buying power to the erosive effects of inflation. Those that are investing farther out on the yield curve are earning even less than overnight money. The impact here could be worse if inflation remains at current levels or higher, or better if the locked-in yields out longer on the curve are met with inflation coming down early on.
The Fed Chair indicated at the two testimony before both Houses of Congress that inflation has been surprisingly sticky. He also indicated that they might increase their expected stopping point on tightening credit. Interest rates out in the periods are actually lower than they had been in recent days and as much as 0.25% lower than they were last Fall. The lower market rates and inverted yield curve suggest the market thinks the Fed has already won and has likely gone too far. This thought process has made it difficult for the Fed Chair and others at the Fed that discuss a further need to throw cold water on an overheated economy. Fed Tightening has not led to an equal amount of upward movement out on the yield curve. This trust or expectation that the Fed has inflation under control would seem to be undermining the Fed’s efforts. With this, the Fed is likely to have to move even further to get the reaction it desires. The risk of an unwanted negative impact on the economy is heightened by the trust the bond market gives to Powell that he has this under control and may have already won.
Powell’s words are that the Fed has lost ground and has much more work to do.
Take Away
At his semiannual testimony to Congress, an important message was sent to the markets. The Fed has the right tools to do the job of bringing inflation down to the 2% range, but those tools operate on the demand side. In the U.S. we are fortunate to have two jobs open for every person seeking employment. While this is inflationary, it provides policy with more options.
As of the reporting of January economic numbers, a trend may be beginning indicating the Fed is losing its fight against inflation. It is likely that it will have to do more, but the Fed stands willing to do what it takes. Powell ended his prepared address by saying, “Everything we do is in service to our public mission. We at the Federal Reserve will do everything we can to achieve our maximum-employment and price-stability goals.”
The Statement on Crypto Vulnerabilities by Regulators
A joint statement to banking organizations on “crypto-asset vulnerabilities” was just released by three bank regulatory agencies. Most banks in the U.S. fall under these three federal institutions overseeing them in a regulatory capacity. So when a statement regarding the health and stability of banks is made, it is often a joint statement from the three. At a minimum, statements include the Federal Reserve Bank (FRB), Office of the Controller of the Currency (OCC), and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. (FDIC).
About the Statement
Issued on February 23rd, the multiple agencies felt a need to highlight liquidity risks presented by some “sources of funding” from crypto-asset-related entities, and practices they should be using to manage the risks.
The regulators remind banks that they are neither prohibited nor discouraged from offering banking services to this class of customer, but if they do, much of the existing risk management principles should be applied.
Related Liquidity Risks
Highlighted in the statement by the three bank regulatory bodies are key liquidity risks associated with crypto asset participants and crypto-asset organizations involved in banking and what they should be aware of.
This includes some sources of funding from crypto-asset-related entities that may pose heightened liquidity risks to those involved in banking due to the unpredictability of the scale and timing of deposit inflows and outflows, including, for example:
Deposits placed by a crypto-asset-related entity that is for the benefit of thecrypto-asset-related entity’s customers. The stability of the deposits, according to the statement, may be driven by the behavior of the end customer or asset sector dynamics, and not solely by the crypto-asset-related entity itself, which is the banking organization’s direct counterparty. The concern is the stability of the deposits may be influenced by, for example, periods of stress, market volatility, and related vulnerabilities in the crypto-asset sector, which may or may not be specific to the crypto-asset-related entity. Such deposits can be susceptible to large and rapid inflows as well as outflows when end customers react to crypto-asset-sector-related market events, media reports, and uncertainty. This uncertainty and resulting deposit volatility can be exacerbated by end customer confusion related to inaccurate or misleading representations of deposit insurance by a crypto-assetrelated entity.
Deposits that constitute stablecoin-related reserves. The stability of this type of deposit may be linked to demand for stablecoins according to the agencies, along with the confidence of stablecoin holders in the coin arrangement, and the stablecoin issuer’s reserve management practices. These deposits can be susceptible to large and rapid outflows stemming from, for unanticipated stablecoin redemptions or dislocations in crypto-asset markets.
More broadly, when a banking organization’s deposit funding base is concentrated in crypto-asset-related entities that are highly interconnected or share similar risk profiles, deposit fluctuations may also be correlated, and liquidity risk therefore may be further heightened, according to the statement.
Effective Risk Management Practices
In light of these hightened risks, agencies think it is critical for banks that use certain sources of funding from crypto-asset-related entities, as described earlier, to actively monitor the liquidity risks inherent in these sources of funding and to establish and maintain effective risk management and controls commensurate with the level of liquidity risks from these funding sources. Effective practices for these banking organizations could include:
Understanding the direct and indirect drivers of the potential behavior of deposits from crypto-asset-related entities and the extent to which those deposits are susceptible to unpredictible vulnerability.
Assessing potential concentration or interconnectedness across deposits from crypto-asset-related entities and the associated liquidity risks.
Incorporating the liquidity risks or funding volatility associated with crypto-asset-related deposits into contingency funding planning, including liquidity stress testing and, as appropriate, other asset-liability governance and risk management processes.
Performing significant due diligence and monitoring of crypto-related-entities that establish deposit accounts, including assessing the representations made by those crypto-asset-related entities to their end customers about the accounts – if innaccurate they could lead to to unexpected or rapid outflows.
Additionally, banks and banking organizations are required to comply with applicable laws and regulations. For FDIC insured institutions, this includes compliance with rules related to brokered deposits and Call Report filing requirements.
The Percentage Volume of Retail Transactions Has Surpassed 2020’s Level
Retail investors were a strong market force in 2021, and after a hiatus through much of 2022, they may be setting the tone in 2023. As a whole, the investors that fall into this category are watching signs that the US Federal Reserve and other central banks may be near the end of their rate hikes. This, coupled with last year’s sell-off, was taken as a sign to selectively jump back into positions. The positions they have been putting on have been moving the needle in the “risk-on” category; this has sent many of last year’s losers up double digits.
Data from JP Morgan demonstrate retail transactions have recently surpassed the market volume peak reached in the Fall of 2020. The more volume as a percentage of trades, the more influence over price movements any investment group has.
JPMorgan Data Shows Retail’s Market Percentage Has Quickly Grown
Retail Investors as % of Investors (JPM)
What Prices Have They Impacted?
During the last week in January, retail market orders as a percent of market value reached 23%, according to JPMorgan. Comparatively, it got to 22% a few times when GameStop (GME) was confounding institutional money while surging in valuation. As with the increase in retail volume during 2020, the renewed interest in committing to trades can have an outsized impact on sector movements and those of favorite stocks.
During the pandemic lockdown period, many self-directed investors chose to follow groups such as r/WallStreetBets on Reddit and forums on other chatrooms and platforms. One strategy that worked was directed at hedge fund short positions. It involved massive buying of stocks that were heavily shorted. The goal was to force the shorts to cover, which would produce buying and a higher stock price. This was effective enough to have caused significant problems with both institutional investors and the brokerage community settling the trades.
As January came to a close Many of the same risk trades, have gotten attention. AMC Theatres (AMC) is up 70% YTD. Cathie Wood’s ARKK fund, which invests in speculative disruptive companies, has risen nearly 46%. Also in the fund category is an ETF that invests in so-called meme stocks (MEME), this is up 41%.
Bitcoin (BTC.X), which had been presumed on its deathbed toward the end of last year, is up over 42% as it continues to track technology.
Will They Again Score?
“Mark my words, it’s going to end in tears,” was a popular line amongst market pundits back in 2020-2021. The Great Unwashed, the Meme Stock Investors, the market participants Jim Kramer called Robin Hoodies don’t have a long track record. But the track record they do have is worth noting.
According to JP Morgan, as of the first week in February, Tesla (TSLA) was the most sold stock by retail investors. Others that have been sold include those categorized as green and infrastructure stocks tied to EVs and 5G broadband.
The most purchased were Amazon (AMZN) and APPLE (AAPL). The hashtag #MOASS, or Mother of All Short Squeezes, has been trending most days on Twitter. The stock tied to the posts is AMC (AMC, APE), as there has been ongoing news surrounding this classic meme stock. One meme stock that has not attracted that much attention is Bed Bath and Beyond (BBBY). The company, which is trading at $3.20 after having been at $22.80 less than a year ago, is on life support, and closing dozens of stores amongst talk of bankruptcy. For those that were able to withstand the retail short-squeeze in BBBY, they may be able to cash in.
Take Away
If the “risk-on” trend among retail investors continues, discretionary institutional money has learned to pay attention. Self-directed investors should also pay attention to new activity, and any rotation from one cooling sector to one that is heating up.
In addition to following the news on Channelchek, investors can watch the Investor Movement Index (IMX) reported on the last weekend of each month by TDAmeritrade. For additional insight, it is always fun to check in on what the message boards are buzzing about and sorting through the serious and the nonsensical on Reddit and Twitter.
Meme Stocks are Putting Up a Strong Offense – Is this a Positive Sign for the Broader Market?
During the first three weeks of 2023, meme stocks and crypto tokens, often viewed in the same category, have scored early. Have meme stock investors now come off the sidelines after the poor performance last year? In 2022 they completely failed to repeat their historic 2021 wins. So the current rally is a great sign.
Successful meme trading occurs when there is a mass movement by retail accounts. So far in 2023, like flipping a New Year’s switch, retail is again causing a commotion. And by looking at the trending hashtags and cashtags on Reddit and Twitter, fans are also making an increased volume of noise.
Looking at the 2023 performance chart above, the S&P 500 ($SPY) opened the year more positively than the prior year ended. While one obviously can not extrapolate out the current 1.59% return for the year, annualizing it helps bring the short period being measured into perspective. The overall market is running at a 30.50% pace this year. Wow.
The performance of GameStop ($GME), which was one of the original and among the most recognized meme stocks, is outperforming the overall market by double. While it is well off its high reached earlier this week, the above 3% return is running well ahead of the overall stock market.
The cryptocurrency in the group, the often maligned Dogecoin (DOGE.X), which is legendary as it started as a parody token, has been tracking Bitcoins (BTC.X) rise closely. DOGE is up over 18% on the year, averaging an increase near 1% per day.
AMC Entertainment ($AMC), which is off its high of almost 50% a few days ago, now has returned over 32% to those holding the stock. To put this in perspective, it has an annualized return in 2023, so far, of 628%. This likely has gotten ahead of itself, time will tell, but it is the clear MVP among the meme stocks to date.
Last year the overall market, despite being down near 20%,, trounced the meme stocks that have thus far put in a stellar showing in 2023.
Is Meme Rally a Reason for Optimism?
Retail dollars coming in off the sidelines and mounting enough of a drive to force values up so quickly indicates a mood change that may play out elsewhere in the financial markets. The average trade size of retail is so small that it indicates a large wave of willingness, if not outright optimism, that putting money in play will lead to gains. Similar forces are causing money to move into mutual funds and ETFs, which serves to put upward pressure on the overall market.
Wall Street’s so-called “fear gauge,” the Volatility Index ($VIX) dropped on average 1% a day since the start of the year. This is a spectacular trend. It now stands near its long-term average of 21; a reading above 30 is considered bearish. The $VIX was last near these levels in April of last year. The overall market stood 15% higher back then compared to today.
The Volatility Index has applications across digital assets as well. On a scale of 1-100, where 100 is overly greedy, The Crypto Fear and Greed Index stands near neutral at 52. This is also the most optimistic reading since April. It may be considered even more positive since the digital asset market is still digesting the “unprecedented” bankruptcy of crypto exchange FTX.
Meme mania has never been about macro; more about crowd behavior, commitment, and momentum. But there are fundamentals that are viewed by stock investors of all varieties that likely have fed into the burst of interest. First, economic data suggests that inflation is trending lower. This deceleration lessens the need for the Federal Reserve to put the brakes on the economy. The enthusiasm is just more pronounced among this style of retail traders that are loud and proud. They serve as cheerleaders to captivate the imagination of more traditional investors.
Take Away
The overall financial markets opened with a sigh of relief in 2023. Meme stocks and crypto opened the year with extreme optimism. The optimism isn’t without cause; a number of factors point to a much better environment than the dismal returns of last year.
Will this contagion, led by many small accounts, inspire further the larger individual and institutional investors to commit investments in the broader markets, there are many signs that suggest the year is starting that way, fear of missing out will build with each day that the markets move in a positive direction.
Cathie Wood Reveals 2022’s Most Disruptive and Innovative Technologies
ARK Invest’s Cathie Wood penned a lookback-themed article about the innovations and disruptive companies of 2022. The purpose seemed to be to remind followers that although during the year, investors may have become disheartened with innovation, ‘look at the amazing opportunities that occurred.’ The innovations and companies highlighted were somewhat overlooked; following the path we are accustomed to from many breakthroughs, they fly under the radar. Then, suddenly they’re widely adopted. Below are many of her picks for innovation and companies she may now wish her funds held large positions in.
The Future of Internet
Suddenly everyone is talking about ChatGPT. According to Wood, artificial intelligence (AI), specifically, ChatGPT is advancing at a pace that is surprising even by standards set by earlier versions. This version of GPT-3, optimized for conversation, signed up one million users in just five days. By comparison, this onboarding of users is incredibly fast benchmarked against the original GPT-3, which took 24 months to reach the same level.
In 2022, TV advertising in the US underwent significant changes. Traditional, non-addressable, non-interactive TV ad spending dropped by 2% to $70 billion, according to Wood. Connected TV (CTV) ad spending on the same terms increased by 14% to ~$21 billion. Pure-play CTV operator Roku’s advertising platform revenue increased 15% year-over-year in the third quarter, the latest report available, while traditional TV scatter markets plummeted 38% year-over-year in the US. Roku maintained its position in the CTV market as the leading smart TV vendor in the US, accounting for 32% of the market.
Digital Wallets are replacing both credit cards and cash. In the category of offline commerce. They overtook cash as the top transaction method in 2020 and accounted for 50% of global online commerce volume in 2021. As an example of the growth, Square’s payment volume soared 193%, six times faster than the 30% increase in total retail spending 2019-2022 (relative to pre-COVID levels).
While overall e-commerce spending increased by 99% over the last three years, social commerce merchandise volume grew even faster. Shopify’s gross merchandise volume grew by 312%, almost four times faster than overall e-commerce and taking a significant share from other retail.
Underlying public blockchains continue to process transactions despite what may be going on surrounding the connected industries. Wood says it highlights that “their transparent, decentralized, and auditable ledgers could be a solution to the fraud and mismanagement associated with centralized, opaque institutions.” She explains, “After the FTX collapse, the share of trading volume on decentralized exchanges, which allow for trading without a central intermediary, rose 37% from 8.35% to 11.44%.
Genomic Revolution
Base editing and multiplexing have the potential to provide more effective CAR-T treatments for patients with otherwise incurable cancers. Cathie Wood provided an example from 2022 about a young girl in the UK with leukemia that went from hopeless in May to Canver-free in November.
In 2022 Dutch scientists at the Hubrecht Institute, UMC Utrecht, and the Oncode Institute used another form of gene editing called prime editing to correct the mutation that causes cystic fibrosis in human stem cells. Another example of how it is being adopted comes from Korean researchers at Yonsei University that used prime editing successfully to treat liver and eye diseases in adult mice.
CRISPR gene editing in Cathie’s words, “has delivered functional cures for beta-thalassemia and sickle cell disease.” She gives examples: CRISPR Therapeutics and Vertex Pharmaceuticals which together have treated more than 75 patients, resulting in some well-publicized “functional cures”. They are expecting FDA approval for Exa-Cel, the treatment for sickle cell and beta thalassemia, in early 2023.
In the category the Ark Invest founder referred to as other cell and gene therapies, she says in 2022, regulators approved several landmark cell and gene therapies. The examples she used to highlight this are Hemgenix for the treatment of Haemophilia B, Zyntelgo for beta thalassemia, Skysona for cerebral adrenoleukodystrophy, Yescarta and Breyanzi for Non-Hodgkin lymphoma, Tecartus for mantle cell lymphoma, and Carvykti and Abecma for multiple myeloma.
Liquid biopsies, blood tests via molecular diagnostic testing are enabling the early detection of colorectal cancer which, if discovered at or before stage 1, have a five-year survival rate greater than 90%. Late-stage or metastatic cancers account for more than 55% of deaths over a five-year period, but only 17% of new diagnoses.
Autonomous Technology & Robotics
During 2022 electric vehicle maker Tesla sales increased by 49% even as automobile sales declined by 8%. Tesla’s share of total auto sales in the US has increased to 3.8% from 1.4% in three years.
During 2022, GM expanded its autonomous driving taxi service to most of San Francisco in the first large-scale rollout in a major US city. Then it launched in both Phoenix and Austin late in the year. The automaker with a stodgy reputation, managed to compress the time to commercialization from nine years in San Francisco to just 90 days in Austin. Tesla, for its part, expanded access to its FSD (full self-driving) beta software to all owners in North America who had requested access.
By January 4, 2023, both Amazon and Walmart had begun deliveries using drones in select US cities. Autonomous logistics technology is no longer futuristic and is likely to continue being adopted and expanded.
Across the top 50 medical device companies, 90% rely on 3D printing for prototyping, testing, and even in some cases printing medical devices.
In 2022, SpaceX nearly doubled the number of rockets it launched to 61. It reused the same rocket in as few as 21 days, a dramatic improvement over the 356 days required for its first rocket reuse. Private Space Exploration is a reality. 61 rockets is an average of more than one per week.
Take Away
Hedge fund manager Cathie Wood took the new year as an opportunity to communicate examples of game-changing innovation that the equity market largely ignored in 2022. She finds these as confidence building that the premise of many of her managed funds is with merit. More importantly, in the face of market headwinds and media criticism, she wants these examples to help boost investor confidence “that ARK’s strategies are on the right side of change.” She tells readers, “innovation solves problems and has historically gained share during turbulent times.”
Could There be an Impact on Robinhood Shareholders with the SBF Share Seizure
Creditors and customers of FTX may be able to reclaim some assets that were wiped out as the feds have been seizing the 7.50% stake in Robinhood (HOOD) stock held by Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF). SBF faces charges of fraud and a myriad of financial crimes after the collapse of FTX in November. The impact of the collapse is having an effect on other areas of finance, including assets that had been controlled by SBF. The Robinhood shares are valued near $450 million, and while this may bring some hope or relief to those that will receive a distribution, there is a risk to HOOD investors.
Background
The FTX bankruptcy has left a line of claimants to recapture what they can from the cryptocurrency giant. Bankruptcies are seldom easy; those that could involve layers of fraud become tied up in even larger disputes and legal battles. For example, the large Robinhood holding is tied up in a dispute between FTX and bankrupt crypto lender BlockFi. The company alleges that SBF put up the shares as collateral for a loan to Alameda Research, a company he also owned.
The HOOD stake was purchased in 2022 through a holding company SBF controlled, Robinhood of course is the innovative broker specializing in self-directed individual investors. Through the DOJ, authorities are going after the shares of HOOD and accounts that are held at the bank Silvergate Capital (SI) which is a banker for the crypto industry.
Separately, court filings on January 4th brought awareness to a NY federal judge ordered last month requiring the seizure of some $93 million that an FTX arm held in accounts at Silvergate. As it relates to this seizure. The Justice Department says it believes the assets seized are not the property of the bankruptcy estate, while a lawyer for FTX maintains that the seizures were from accounts not directly controlled by the company. They were ordered in connection with the criminal case involving SBF.
FTX investors’ asset claims in the exchange, which was once valued at $32 billion, come after creditors and other rightful claimants.
How This Could Impact Robinhood Shareholders
Asset seizures and later distribution to those hurt by fraud involve liquidation of the assets seized. In the case of stocks, they will be sold and turned into cash. Imagine a sudden effort to sell 7.50% of any company. That is a large percentage to move. The stake, worth between $400 and $500 million, may serve as a dark cloud depressing share prices and slowing any planned growth of the company. It may eventually culminate in liquidation at a pace not conducive to retaining a level stock price.
Lack of Crypto Governance, Oversight, Standards, and Risk Management Frightens Feds
Three Federal Agencies have warned banks about the dangers of dealing with digital assets. On the first banking day of the new year, the Federal Reserve (Fed), the FDIC, and the Office of the Controller of the Currency (OCC), the three banking regulators in the US, issued a three-page joint warning to banks. It points to eight risks that banking organizations should not let migrate to the US banking system. And highlights processes to mitigate these risks while the three agencies develop frameworks to oversee the ever-changing asset class.
The Joint Statement on Crypto-Asset Risks to Banking Organizations is for the consumption of banks of all types and sizes through the US that have or may adopt policies. It warns the events of 2022 have “been marked by significant volatility,” and that vulnerabilities in the crypto-asset sector have surfaced.
The joint statement explains that banking organizations that have in the past seeked to engage in activities that involve crypto-assets. Have been taken on a case-by-case basis. “The agencies continue to build knowledge, expertise, and understanding of the risks crypto-assets may pose to banking organizations, their customers, and the broader U.S. financial system.” The statement says that the significant risks “highlighted by recent failures of several large crypto-asset companies,” will cause the three agencies to take a careful and cautious approach.
The agencies highlighted eight risks that they wanted banking organizations engaged in crypto-assets to understand may not be in accordance with safe and sound banking practices:
Risk of fraud and scams among crypto-asset sector participants.
Legal uncertainties related to custody practices, redemptions, and ownership rights, some of which are currently the subject of legal processes and proceedings.
Inaccurate or misleading representations and disclosures by crypto-asset companies, including misrepresentations regarding federal deposit insurance, and other practices that may be unfair, deceptive, or abusive, contributing to significant harm to retail and institutional investors, customers, and counterparties.
Significant volatility in crypto-asset markets, the effects of which include potential impacts on deposit flows associated with crypto-asset companies.
Susceptibility of stablecoins to run risk, creating potential deposit outflows for banking organizations that hold stablecoin reserves.
Contagion risk within the crypto-assetsector resulting from interconnections among certain crypto-asset participants, including through opaque lending, investing, funding, service, and operational arrangements. These interconnections may also present concentration risks for banking organizations with exposures to the crypto-asset sector.
Risk management and governance practices in the crypto-asset sector exhibiting a lack of maturity and robustness.
Heightened risks associated with open, public, and/or decentralized networks, or similar systems, including, but not limited to, the lack of governance mechanisms establishing oversight of the system; the absence of contracts or standards to clearly establish roles, responsibilities, and liabilities; and vulnerabilities related to cyber-attacks, outages, lost or trapped assets, and illicit finance.
Take Away
In 2022 the young crypto asset class took a beating similar to high-tech stocks. There is a reason banks are limited to their stock market activity. It seems that these three federal agencies, which do not include work being done by the SEC (or CFTC), are now working hard to regulate what banks can do involving these assets; in the meantime, they want to let banking organizations know that crypto-assets need to be dealt with extreme caution, perhaps moderation, and know that as far as the regulators are concerned, if they still want to serve crypto customers, they should discuss all planned activities with the appropriate regulator prior to filing an application and should ensure that risk management, including board oversight, policies, procedures, risk assessments, controls, gates and guardrails, and monitoring, are in place to effectively identify and manage risks.
Bitcoin’s Largest Corporate Owner Sold But Remains a net Buyer
“Bitcoin is the exit strategy,” says Michael Saylor, the Executive Chairman overseeing Microstrategy (MSTR), a company he founded. The comment was to a question in a Twitter Space interview with Eric Weiss of Bitcoin Roundtable. During this insightful interview, it becomes clear that the enterprise analytics company stands behind its commitment to the cryptocurrency and is investing in the ecosystem in other ways. Saylor also addressed his recent sale of 704 bitcoin, explaining it created tax benefits that serve stockholders.
The Company is a Bitcoin Maximalist
Bitcoin owners are “Either traders, technocrats, or maximalists.” Explained Saylor in the podcast-style interview.
Accordingly, Saylor says, traders don’t have any opinion on it long-term other than it’s an asset that moves enough to trade. Holding times may be minutes or months.
Technocrats view bitcoin as a digital monetary network like Google or Facebook. It’s a big tech network to them, so if they are bullish on big tech, they will hold bitcoin. And they may try to time their investments based on economic trends.
Maximalists view bitcoin as an instrument of economic empowerment that is just good for the human race. If you’re a maximalist, you don’t try to time it, and you have a much longer time horizon. While the technocrats are looking out 3-5 years, and they think that’s long, maximalists are looking out 10-100 years. Part of that is believing this is good for the human race.
“We’re maximalists, we think bitcoin is more than a digital monetary network; we think it is the digital monetary network. It’s good for the human race, and anything we can do in order to encourage adoption of bitcoin, and help with the adoption, is going to be good for the world.” Saylor while discussing Microstrategy.
Saylor’s company is the largest owner of bitcoin, costing Microstrategy a little more than $4 billion, the crypto assets are now valued just above $2 billion. Saylor says how we acquire bitcoin is less market-driven, as this is permanent capital that flows into the bitcoin ecosystem. Permanent capital that becomes part of the Microstrategy enterprise. Capital that is ongoing and may be held as a base forever.
In Response to December Selling
Michael Saylor recently took some criticism for selling 704 bitcoin after previously repeating he won’t sell bitcoin. He put the confusion to rest by explaining the benefit to stockholders of tax loss harvesting. With crypto the selling is treated as property so you can take the capital loss, “so we have some capital gains we pay taxes on, and then we have some capital, losses in bitcoin, so by selling the bitcoin, and taking the capital loss, we’re able to use that to offset some capital gains.” He added, it’s very tax efficient for the corporation.” Which is good for shareholders.
Lightning Network
Lightning allows “lightning-fast” blockchain payments without worrying about block confirmation times. Payment speed measured in milliseconds to seconds.Security is enforced by blockchain smart-contracts without creating an on-blockchain transaction for individual payments.
Microstrategy has said they will be offering bitcoin Lightning solutions in the first quarter of 2023. This tech investment in the growth of Microstrategy is another way Saylor and company support the bitcoin ecosystem.“If bitcoin is the underlying base layer, I think that Lightning is money over IP.” He said it’s an open permissionless protocol to let eight million people move money and monetary assets at the speed of light.
“We want to make it possible for any enterprise to spin up Lighting infrastructure in an afternoon” and onboard thousands of employees or customers, Saylor explained. “We want to plug it into enterprise technology and make it a marketing strategy for any forward-thinking CMO.”
Areas that MicroStrategy is exploring for Lightning services include online content monetization, enterprise marketing, web paywalls, and internal corporate controls. Every chief marketing officer should be able give away satoshis –– Bitcoin’s smaller denomination unit –– as incentive for customers
Take Away
Bitcoin still has its perma-bulls. Michael Saylor of Microstrategy is solidly in that category. He is not necessarily bullish on other crypto or digital currencies, bitcoin is the digital currency in his mind, and he intends for the ongoing holding of bitcoin and growth of the company in other ways that support its adoption.
Caroline Ellison Now Enters a New Stage of Her Young Life
Caroline Ellison, the 28-year-old former CEO of Alameda Research, pleaded guilty to seven criminal charges, including wire fraud and conspiracy to commit securities fraud, according to her plea agreement, signed Monday. Caroline, the former chief executive of Alameda Research, a trading firm with close ties to FTX, is said to face up to 115 years in prison. Her admitted role in allowing customer funds to flow through an electronic “backdoor” to be used by Sam Bankman Fried (SBF) of FTX tells us a little bit about her recent past, but who is Ms. Ellison, and how did she get to be CEO of Alameda?
What is Alameda Research?
SBF’s portfolio of crypto companies started with his founding of Alameda research in 2017. Alameda Research was, until very recently, a cryptocurrency trading firm known to specialize in quantitative research and providing liquidity to cryptocurrency and digital assets markets.
Ellison joined the Alameda team as a trader in 2018 and became its co-CEO in 2021.
Bankman-Fried had started Alameda Research as a high-risk, high-reward crypto trading firm using high-risk tactics. He has admitted he included “research” in the name to give it a better vibe. In an NPR podcast in 2017, he was shown to be aggressively taking advantage of the “wild west” crypto playing field. SBF grew his crypto-related business into more complex cryptocurrency trading, accessible to the masses, with his founding of FTX, a crypto exchange, in 2019. He did this by leveraging his image as highly experienced in crypto, which helped him to raise money from firms like BlackRock.
Who Is Caroline Ellison?
In a now-removed YouTube video and podcast, Caroline discussed her background and upbringing in an FTX public relations-type interview dated July 2020.
The 28-year-old Ellison grew up outside of Boston in a town called Newton. Her parents are professors, Glenn Ellison, her father, is a professor of economics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology (MIT), and Sara Fischer Ellison lectures at the prestigious school.
Ellison said in the podcast that she inherited a natural aptitude for math and entered math competitions at a young age. She further would demonstrate that she was some kind of prodigy by telling people that by age five, she read a Harry Potter book by herself. “I refused to wait for my parents to read it [to me],” she said.
She went on to major in math at Stanford. After applying for trading internships, a field that is very competitive for new graduates, she landed at Jane Street Capital, a well-respected firm on Wall Street. After her internship, she worked there for a year and a half.
Is Caroline Elliman or was Caroline Elliman Sam Bankman Fried’s girlfriend? There are sources that say that Ellison met Bankman-Fried at Jane Street. He worked there from June 2014 to September 2017, according to his LinkedIn, which is still live and has 28,250 followers.
Ellison said she learned about Alameda over coffee with then-CEO Bankman-Fried while visiting the Bay Area and decided “it seemed like too cool of an opportunity to pass up.” She joined the company in 2018.
Bankman-Fried would then resign as CEO of Alameda but retained his role as CEO of FTX. In October 2021, Ellison became co-CEO with Sam Trabucco, a former trader at Susquehanna International Group.
Trabucco resigned in August 2022 to “spend a lot of time traveling,” according to one of his tweets, saying he “bought a boat.”
Was There Romance Between Ellison and SBF?
When a book about this is written, and the movie is out, it will include sex.
There have been rumors of polyamory. This is a relationship behavior that involves connections with more than one person. According to a Coindesk article from November, among the FTX executives, in the Bahamas, “All 10 are, or used to be, paired up in romantic relationships with each other.” There have also been suggestions that FTX employees and Bankman-Fried spent lavishly on the island, from yachts to thousands of dollars a day on catering.
Take Away
Financial fraud comes in many forms. Often it starts out innocently when a bad trade happens, someone tries to cover it up, and the markets don’t cooperate to bail out the bad trade, then more illegal actions are taken to cover that up. There have also been situations where unqualified, not experienced persons are in charge and either unaware of the magnitude of their deceptive actions or are following orders, perhaps just going along because others are doing it too. Then there are those that enjoy the attention they get by being out front and sharing wealth and buying fame. Another more common deceit is someone who is just plain old greedy. All are criminal.
I am not sure what the driver was in the Alameda/FTX, SBF Caroline Ellison (and others) case, but I am sure we will hear much more about this. As we do, remember the importance of trusting those you conduct business with and questioning them anyway.
Senate Banking Committee Chairman Could Support Difficult Crypto Ban
Most new and revolutionary innovations go through growing pains – and at times fraud and deceit. Cryptocurrency and all the ancillary services are no different. One common reaction to some crypto problems is for legislators or regulators to swoop in and show they are protecting citizens from the newly discovered dangers. The cryptocurrency market is now 13 years young and not yet mature. This is evidenced by the meltdown of crypto exchange FTX, which has just placed the entire crypto industry in the crosshairs of the head of the Senate Banking Committee as well as others in Washington. Will crypto survive?
Killing Crypto?
With swirling allegations of fraud, misuse of customer funds, and negligence, the bankruptcy of cryptocurrency exchange FTX has caused lawmakers to try to take action to protect US citizens from activity that largely takes place outside of the States. The chairman of the Senate Banking Committee went as far as to suggest a total ban on cryptocurrencies.
When asked on NBC’s Meet the Press this past weekend whether regulation only gives legitimacy to crypto, rather than a ban, Senate Banking Committee Chair Sherrod Brown said that an immediate course of action is to have the Treasury Department embolden federal agencies such as the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).
“We want them to do what they need to do,” the Senator said, “at the same time, maybe banning it—although banning it is very difficult because it will go offshore, and who knows how that will work.”
Banning crypto would be difficult. Most transactions in the world’s digital currencies and tokens take place outside of the US, including major platforms such as Binance and Deribit.
Does Regulation Help?
While crypto is becoming a topic of scrutiny among lawmakers, the push to regulate digital assets has in some ways served as a safer opening for institutional investors to involve themselves in the asset class. A ban would seem catastrophic to publicly traded, US based Coinbase (COIN), and also halt some investment but could be largely ineffective, chasing transactions offshore. “One in six American households own crypto, a domestic ban at this stage would only lead to more FTX-like situations where Americans are forced to interact with off-shore exchanges that have no regulatory oversight,” a Coinbase spokesperson told investment publication Barron’s, adding, “Congress should focus on passing workable, comprehensive federal crypto legislation that protects consumers, enables innovation, and bolsters American competitiveness.”
A ban in place since 2021 on mining or trading cryptocurrencies in China has not prevented the country from being number two worldwide in crypto mining with 20% of the market share. The country also is ranked 10th in terms of transactions.
Take Away
New investment products have ups and downs. Regulations are clearly on their way in the crypto asset class, but an outright ban would seem to be more lip service from the Senate Banking Committee chair than something that may be implemented. The asset class has now become so entrenched in portfolios of so many in the US, including retirees, and so available outside US jurisdictions that it would seem that any measure to protect investors would be regulatory and implemented slowly.
