Connect with us

Crypto

The SEC holds its first cryptocurrency roundtable

Published

on

The SEC holds its first cryptocurrency roundtable

Last Friday, the Securities and Exchange Commission held its first-ever crypto roundtable, a discussion with industry leaders and skeptics to answer a grand question: how should the SEC regulate crypto?

The agency under President Donald Trump is taking what many see as a friendlier approach to cryptocurrency and has already dropped a number of lawsuits against various crypto exchanges initiated during the Biden Administration.

Marketplace’s Meghan McCarty Carino spoke with Brady Dale, reporter and author of the Axios Crypto newsletter, about what was discussed and why the question of regulating crypto like a stock or a bond is a very complicated one to answer.

The following is an edited transcript of their conversation.

Brady Dale: Well, the big topic was just, how do you characterize crypto assets? You know, the skeptics on board were like, these are all securities, and they should all just be treated like securities and that’s really complicated, and the court should just sort it out. And of course, if that’s the way you do it, it’s going to take a really long time, because courts aren’t fast. And the folks the other side were like, it’s not fair to lump all of these assets into one bucket. A lot of them do very different things, and so they were encouraging the SEC to refine their approach, to look at, you know, different assets different ways. Don’t treat diesel trucks like they’re Pintos, you know, as a way you might put it, sort of thinking about cars.

Advertisement

Meghan McCarty Carino: So why is this such an important distinction, whether or not these digital assets are considered securities and what are kind of the arguments in each column?

Dale: The big picture of why it’s so important is, if all crypto assets were securities, they basically become useless. The folks who make these things don’t want to just trade them willy nilly forever. They don’t want to just bet on “number go up forever.” They want them to be a part of the real economy eventually, they want them to be used for all kinds of things, sorting out complex new applications for making payments. But if they’re securities, that means they’re subject to all kinds of rules and have to be tucked away in these special digital vaults controlled by third parties, and you just can’t do any of that stuff. So it’s kind of existential for these networks that they not all be treated like securities. Some of them can be, that’s fine, but just not all of them, or sure, they can be treated like securities for a while when they’re new and things are getting worked out. But if enough people are using them, if this decentralization thing people talk about really takes off, for one, then they can graduate out and can be freely traded the same way that like coffee or gold is freely traded and no one will watch it. And then that’s an okay middle ground. The other side is like, look, none of this stuff is ever going to be useful for anything. It’s all just a big casino, and so we ought to regulate it as tightly as possible. So that’s sort of the other side’s take on it.

McCarty Carino: Then there’s sort of been this bigger foundational question of what exactly the SEC has regulatory jurisdiction over? Is it the crypto token itself or the transaction? Why is this an important issue?

Dale: Man, it’s so subtle. I mean, the more attorneys I talk to, it does seem clear. And this is, I mean, this is so fuzzy, but it’s like [what] we talk a lot about is, are crypto tokens securities? And the truth is, that’s kind of the wrong question. And everyone kind of knows that, it’s just we say it this simpler way, but the real question is like, is the actual transaction, is that an investment contract? And so the easiest, there’s a lot of subtleties here, but I think the easiest distinction that can be made is one thing I think most people agree on, is if somebody is selling tokens before like a product even exists, to investors ahead of time, to raise money, to hire developers to actually build the thing, that is a kind of transaction that looks a lot more like a security, whereas once the thing is live and people can use it, then it should be able to freely trade. That’s a secondary market transaction, and maybe that’s less likely to be a security transaction. And, you know, one point that one of the attorneys made at this session on Friday was that, in fact, the SEC has never actually won a case on the idea that secondary market transactions are a security. They’ve gotten some sort of earlier stage things in courts that have kind of said it, but not a full case so that’s a fuzzier area, but one that the industry seems to be making some headway on. So yeah, it’s this really subtle point that I’m sure will leave your listeners scratching your head, but if it makes them feel better, it also leaves everyone else who’s been following this for a year scratching their head too. So it’s a tough one.

McCarty Carino: So did we get any sort of sense of what direction the SEC may be going in in the near future?

Advertisement

Dale: Not on Friday, because the commissioners really didn’t have much to say at it, you know. But I mean, when Commissioner [Hester] Peirce, who’s the head of the task force, announced the task force with her blog post, “The Journey Begins,” and she said a part of Americans’ freedom is the right to invest in whatever we want and that includes the right to lose money without the government telling you what is a good investment and what is a bad investment. You know, she’s very clear on the idea that the SEC is a disclosure-based regime. That means their job is to make sure investors have all the facts they need, not to tell investors like, this is good or this is bad. So I think that’s the direction we can probably expect. You know, the nice thing about blockchains is you can have 24/7, round-the-clock, complete pictures of the distributions of these tokens and assets, you know, all the time. You could probably have better disclosures than you have about the equity market now, if we have a regulator who says kind of what those disclosures should look like, and I think that’s what the industry is sort of waiting for.

McCarty Carino: The SEC has made some notable signals. It dropped several crypto lawsuits in the last couple of months, can you kind of explain what’s going on there? Which ones were of note to you?

Dale: I would like to tell your listeners that the lawsuits that were dropped were all just over this bureaucratic question of what is or isn’t a security and should, you know, a particular company have been trading this thing or not and that is true for almost all of the cases that were dropped. So most of them were cases where, like, Coinbase, for example, the SEC was saying, well, you’re letting people trade securities on your platform. And Coinbase was like, I don’t think we are. And that was a debate. You know, it’s an important question but it’s not like there’s someone deeply harmed and there’s not some big crime, you know, in the middle there. So it’s a bureaucratic question, right? It’s an important bureaucratic question. It’s a bureaucratic question. And so mostly what the SEC has done is dropped those cases in order to say, like, look, let’s figure out what the rules are and then we can decide who we should get mad at. However, when you ask, like, what stands out to me? There were two cases it was doing in which there were more serious allegations. And so that was Binance and the case against Justin Sun, the creator of this token, Tron. Folks may remember him as the guy who bought the $6 million banana artwork. And in both of those cases, the SEC was alleging various degrees of market manipulation and that’s more serious. And so it’s somewhat more disturbing that they dropped those cases without sort of dealing with that piece as much. But in most other cases, it was just over this esoteric question of like, what should the SEC be regulating and what should they leave alone?

More on this

One recent policy the SEC did land on was about meme coins, those crypto tokens branded with internet trends or celebrities, like the Shiba Inu dog that inspired dogecoin or more recently, President Trump’s meme coin.

The SEC has clarified those are not securities.

Advertisement

Meanwhile, World Liberty Financial, the decentralized crypto venture backed by the President and his family, says it has launched a new stablecoin — a type of crypto coin which typically has a fixed value tied to another asset, in this case, U.S. government debt.

According to reporting in the Wall Street Journal, the stablecoin — called USD1 — will be tied to short-term treasury bonds and cash deposits. It will be issued on the Ethereum network and a blockchain created by the crypto exchange Binance.

As Brady noted, Binance had been the target of an SEC lawsuit until the new administration put it on hold last month.

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Crypto

Residents question proposed crypto mining center

Published

on

Residents question proposed crypto mining center

STARKVILLE – Potentially higher utility bills and sound pollution topped the list of concerns raised by six residents who addressed the board of aldermen Tuesday about a cryptocurrency mining facility proposed for Industrial Park Road.

Vice Mayor Roy Perkins, who represents Ward 6, said he has fielded similar concerns from constituents following the board’s June 12 work session, during which members heard a presentation about the potential project.

“I know these things need to have full accountability, full transparency and different things,” Perkins said. “… Well you can rest assured the vice mayor is going to be on assignment. I’m going to do my part. I’m not going to do anything that’s going to negatively impact this community.”

The proposed facility would be a specialized type of data center designed to mine cryptocurrency, a digital currency that operates independently of government-backed financial systems. It is stored in digital wallets and fluctuates in value.

Advertisement

Mining facilities use specialized computers that draw large energy loads to secure the digital transactions that take place. The center proposed in Starkville would be much smaller than “hyperscale data centers” that store and process data for large tech companies.

Utility usage topped the concerns of most residents with Pam Jones, the first to speak, set the tone.

“I understand that this is on a smaller scale than the hyper-scale facilities, and I just wanted to be sure that we had ordinances in place that will count the noise, especially at night and that there will be water and power management,” Jones said.

Other residents took issue with what they see as a lack of transparency around the proposed project.

“I was quite disappointed to learn (the mining facility) was not an agenda item today,” said Eadie Keenan, a Ward 7 resident. “… Quite frankly, I have more questions than can fit in three minutes.”

Advertisement

Tiffany Womack, another Starkville resident, echoed Kennan’s concerns, adding utility usage and market volatility to her own list of issues.

“If (the center was) to go bankrupt or something like that, would that possibly fall back on the responsibility of Starkville citizens?” Womack asked.

Mayor Lynn Spruill did not answer each question individually, instead encouraging those with questions to watch the June 12 presentation. Due to the project’s early stage, she noted the board does not yet know answers to all the questions raised during Tuesday’s meeting.

“I brought (the center) to the board as an opportunity for us to begin that process of learning so we are nowhere near making a decision,” Spruill said. “Which is why it isn’t on the agenda and won’t be on the agenda for some time.”

Spruill said the proposed center is currently going through the staff vetting process. Once the process is complete, staff will make a recommendation to the board on whether to pursue the center. At that time, Spruill expects to be able to answer residents’ remaining questions.

Advertisement

Spruill said transparency is important to her and the board while going through the process of vetting the mining center.

“Nothing is being hidden. It’s all out there for everybody to see, and we’ll make decisions based on facts not on Facebook craziness,” Spruill said. “… We want facts, and we want all decisions to be made with facts. And so hopefully that will put some of your concerns (to rest), at least to the extent that this is nowhere near something that will be on the agenda.”

Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 24 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.

Advertisement

Quality, in-depth journalism is essential to a healthy community. The Dispatch brings you the most complete reporting and insightful commentary in the Golden Triangle, but we need your help to continue our efforts. In the past week, our reporters have posted 24 articles to cdispatch.com. Please consider subscribing to our website for only $2.30 per week to help support local journalism and our community.

Continue Reading

Crypto

Jim Rickards Asked Robert Kiyosaki to Read One Manuscript, Then His View of Global Finance Changed

Published

on

Jim Rickards Asked Robert Kiyosaki to Read One Manuscript, Then His View of Global Finance Changed

Key Takeaways

Why Did One Manuscript Change Robert Kiyosaki’s View?

Robert Kiyosaki, the author of the best-selling personal finance book Rich Dad Poor Dad, said an advance manuscript of “The Entropy Trap” shared by Jim Rickards prompted him to rethink how he views global finance. Rickards is an economist, lawyer, and financial commentator known for writing about currencies, debt, and systemic market risk. Kiyosaki said the early reading changed his perspective on where the financial system may be headed.

The reaction was framed around a warning about financial change. The book, written by Mickey M. Maini, “blew my mind and opened my eyes to what & why global financial change is coming,” Kiyosaki described. His comments focused on what he described as a shift in the rules behind wealth, assets, and trust.

The central claim is that wealth could move away from people relying on traditional financial assumptions. Kiyosaki asserted:

“The informed will be tomorrow’s ULTRA RICH. Todays uniformed operating by the old rules of money… will become the new poor.”

The Warning Behind the Claim

The warning centers on assets that depend on trust, including U.S. bonds, exchange-traded funds (ETFs), and mutual funds. Kiyosaki framed those instruments as vulnerable under the financial shift he says is coming, placing commonly held investment products at the center of the risk.

That claim is severe, but he presented it as a warning rather than a proven outcome. He also pointed to large bondholders, including Japan, saying they have already started dumping U.S. bonds. He did not provide supporting data in the statement.

The acclaimed author shared:

Advertisement

“Message from book… ‘All assets that require trust, assets that most people have… such as U.S. bonds, ETFs, mutual funds will be flushed down toilets, all over the world.’”

The broader conflict is whether traditional financial assets remain reliable under the conditions Kiyosaki described. His framing divides investors between those preparing for a changed financial system and those still operating under assumptions he says may no longer hold.

What Still Needs to Be Proven

A planned August study session could clarify the warning Kiyosaki described. He said his study team would examine the message and that Rickards may join, though the evidence behind the claims has not yet been laid out.

For now, the warning rests on Kiyosaki’s account of a manuscript that changed his view. He urged readers to prepare, writing:

“I want you to be one of the world’s new rich.”

What remains unknown is whether market data, policy moves, or investor behavior will confirm the risk he described.

His recent commentary has focused on what he describes as fragility in the global monetary system, particularly around the U.S. dollar. He has pointed to rising debt, central bank policies, and inflation as risks that could trigger a sharp market downturn.

Advertisement

Alongside those concerns, he has repeatedly highlighted bitcoin, gold, and silver as alternative stores of value. In his view, those assets may help reduce exposure to traditional financial instruments during periods of currency weakness and market turbulence.

Continue Reading

Crypto

Strategy Is No Longer Just Going to “Inoculate the Market,” Selling Crypto May Be Much More Common. Here’s What That Could Mean for the Stock | The Motley Fool

Published

on

Strategy Is No Longer Just Going to “Inoculate the Market,” Selling Crypto May Be Much More Common. Here’s What That Could Mean for the Stock | The Motley Fool

When Strategy (MSTR 0.69%) sold a modest amount of Bitcoin earlier this year, it was a noteworthy development given that the company’s business has centered around buying up as much of the cryptocurrency as it can, and vowing to never sell. And it often boasts of being the largest corporate holder of the digital currency.

The company brushed off the sale of 32 Bitcoins, with management saying it simply wanted to “inoculate the market.” Well, now it appears that Strategy is doing much more than just that, and there could be more significant cryptocurrency sales in the future.

Image source: Getty Images.

Strategy unveils a Bitcoin monetization program

On June 29, Strategy released a framework going forward that it says will “enhance liquidity, preserve long-term Bitcoin exposure, and support long-term value creation for shareholders.” Among the notable components is its Bitcoin monetization program.

Within that program, the company says it may sell some of its cryptocurrency holdings for multiple reasons, including to fund a USD reserve, fund dividends or interest expense, or to fund repurchases of digital credit securities or common stock.

Advertisement

While the company says it remains committed to Bitcoin for the long term and it’s the company’s “primary treasury reserve asset,” it’s a significant change of course for Strategy, which was previously heavily against ever selling the digital asset.

Strategy Stock Quote

Today’s Change

(-0.69%) $-0.69

Current Price

$100.08

The stock is as risky and volatile as ever

Whether or not Strategy buys or sells Bitcoin doesn’t change the fact that this is a highly risky and speculative stock to own. While crypto fans may be disappointed in the company’s change in strategy, selling Bitcoin will likely not be enough to make the business any better or worse as an investment.

In just the past 12 months, the stock has plummeted a whopping 75% as volatility in digital assets has drastically weighed on its earnings, with the company incurring $12.8 billion in losses over the trailing 12 months, on revenue of $490 million.

That’s not likely to change significantly, even if Strategy offloads some of its crypto holdings, because with such a large exposure to Bitcoin, how the cryptocurrency performs will inevitably impact the company’s bottom line in a big way. This year, the leading cryptocurrency is down 28% as investor excitement around it has largely cooled off, which has proven disastrous for Strategy’s stock as well. And at this stage, there’s little reason to anticipate a recovery anytime soon.

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending