With Washington recommitted to innovation, cryptocurrencies need a congressional fix

By Former Rep. George Nethercutt. June 20, 2021. (The Hill).

Congress just achieved a rare bipartisan feat in passing the “Endless Frontier Act” through the Senate. This bold legislative package recommits the U.S. to technological innovation and global leadership in the race against Chinese domination. At the very least, Republicans and Democrats understand that the U.S. must do more to win this fight. However, unless the Biden administration and Congress change their current attention deficit on cryptocurrencies, America’s efforts may be in vain.

Beneath the headlines and outside of the halls of Congress, federal bureaucrats are actively circumventing Congress and using the courts to regulate the U.S. cryptocurrency industry. The total lack of regulatory clarity in the Securities Act is the main culprit and consensus is building. This is especially evident to observers of the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) December 2020 lawsuit against San Francisco-based enterprise software company Ripple over its distribution of the cryptocurrency XRP.

Read the Full Article Here.

We Need A Ripple Test To Stop The SEC’s Overreach On Cryptocurrency

By Roslyn Layton. May 18, 2021. (Forbes).

The regulatory future of cryptocurrency seems destined to be decided by the courts, thanks to an ill-conceived lawsuit filed by the Securities and Exchange Commission. If Ripple’s arguments prevail in the Southern District of New York and on appeal, this case could give the Supreme Court a chance to review the 1946 Howey decision which set a standard for what constitutes a security. 

Courtroom Showdown

I’ve covered the SEC’s case against Ripple Labs case since it was filed by the SEC in December 2020 because it had all the hallmarks of classic enforcement overreach. Ripple and cryptocurrency investors have fought back with robust arguments while the SEC has stumbled and exposed its former leaders’ troubling conflicts of interest. It looks like something bigger than a mere lawsuit. The historical moment adds urgency to resolving whether XRP is a currency or security, a question which financial innovation makes difficult, but also demonstrates the SEC’s abuse of its authority.

The total market cap of all cryptocurrencies, including the XRP digital token at the heart of the Ripple case, tops $2 trillion dollars. The sum of these digital assets is now worth more than the total number of U.S. dollars in circulation. Global companies like Goldman Sachs and PayPal are racing to adopt the technology for consumer products. But more ominously, China has already rolled out a central bank digital currency (CBDC) called the Digital Yuan for domestic commercial and consumer use on a big scale. Mastercard has opened talks to act as a financial bridge for China to expand the Digital Yuan’s global network, export its applications and compete against both cryptocurrencies as the U.S. dollar in the emerging digital economy.

Read the Full Article Here.

Ripple case seen as precedent for cryptocurrency regulation

By Keith Lewis. May 4, 2021. (Roll Call)

Cryptocurrency experts are closely watching a legal battle between Ripple Labs Inc. and the Securities and Exchange Commission, anticipating the case could establish precedent and clarify the regulatory landscape for digital coin offerings.

The SEC last year sued the company, CEO Brad Garlinghouse and Executive Chairman Chris Larsen in the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York, alleging they should have registered XRP under securities law. Ripple and its executives have asked the court to dismiss the case.

Ripple scored wins in preliminary rulings in the federal court, including gaining access to internal SEC documents and shielding its executives’ personal bank records from discovery. Holders of Ripple’s XRP cryptocurrency at issue in the litigation were also granted permission in April to intervene in the case.

Read the Full Article Here.

Cryptocurrencies Are Not a Fad, They’re a Revolution. America Needs to Prepare.

By Bill Tai. May 4, 2021. (Morning Consult).

In the mid-1970s, a cutting-edge group of hackers founded the Homebrew Computer Club in Silicon Valley. Their specialty was developing tools to break into the telephone systems of major corporations, and they went on to create innovative technologies that changed the world, generating millions of dollars in value along the way. One of those hackers was Steve Jobs.

It was in the days of an innovation economy that fostered risk and was free from crushing regulations that I found my start and built a career in technology, as did the founders of companies like Apple, Microsoft, Intel, and Cisco. The disruption of incumbents, however uncomfortable, placed Silicon Valley on the map and put the United States at the forefront of an economic revolution that forever changed the way we live.

As we near the end of the coronavirus pandemic and step into a new chapter of our nation’s economy, one that’s more digitally connected than ever before, we should create policies to foster this same sense of innovation within today’s tech sector. Under the new leadership of the Biden administration, America has an opportunity to take a fresh look at one such disruptive technology: blockchain and cryptocurrencies.

Read the Full Article Here.

Was there corrupt intent at the SEC?

By John E. Deaton, Founder and Host of CryptoLaw.

You would think that blatant government corruption and self-dealing was the stuff of a Hollywood movie, but when you peel back the layers of the Ripple case, examine its origins, and review key facts related to some of its central figures at the Securities and Exchange Commission, a larger story emerges that can’t be ignored.

Former Chairman Jay Clayton, ex-Corporation Finance Director William Hinman, and former Enforcement Director Marc Berger took very specific actions while they were in office, related to very specific cryptocurrencies. In parallel, they have very specific financial interests related to cryptocurrencies, which were benefited by those actions, while millions of retail holders of a specific cryptocurrency were directly harmed. 

Those are the indisputable facts, and taken together they point very clearly to something very troubling behind the SEC’s filing of the Ripple case on Clayton’s last day in office. How can we look at these facts and just dismiss the idea of corrupt intent? 

Here is what we know, in detail:

  • Before joining the SEC, we know that both Clayton and Hinman earned massive fees to support Chinese tech giant Alibaba Group carry out its 2014 IPO on the New York Stock Exchange. Alibaba’s Alipay is the largest digital mobile payments platform in the world, and its New York IPO set the stage for China’s intended dominance in global digital payments.
  • By 2016, Chinese-controlled bitcoin miners had moved to control 65% of the bitcoin network hash rate.  Since bitcoin is a proof-of-work token, this gives China control of its network.
  • On May 9, 2017, William Hinman was named the Director of Division of Corporation Finance at the SEC. Upon his appointment to the SEC, Hinman left his post at the law firm Simpson Thacher – which sits on the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance and represents cryptocurrency-related financial interests – but continued to receive millions in financial payments from the firm.  In short, Hinman had a clear financial interest in any regulatory action by the SEC related to cryptocurrencies – while he was serving in a top SEC position!  This was something one former SEC ethics lawyer said was “a little unsettling.” (A little?) 
  • In 2018, Clayton publicly declared bitcoin not a security, sending the price of bitcoin soaring.
  • During a 2018 Yahoo Finance summit in San Francisco, Hinman declared that the Ethereum token, ether, is not a security.  The price of ether skyrocketed.
  • In 2019, Simpson Thacher led Chinese-based crypto mining company Canaan to their IPO. Canaan provides the technology used for mining bitcoin, and is publicly bullish on Bitcoin.  Hinman was still at the SEC when this happened, and still collecting checks from Simpson Thacher.
  • In early November 2020, then-Director of National Intelligence John Ratcliffe wrote Chairman Clayton to express his growing concerns over China’s dominance in crypto and the risk it poses for U.S. national security.
  • On December 4, 2020, Hinman resigned from the SEC.
  • On December 22, 2020 – Clayton’s last day in office – the SEC Enforcement division led by Berger filed its lawsuit against Ripple and its executives alleging that XRP sales over seven years were unregistered securities trades.  The complaint indicates “all sales” were illegal, therefore ensnaring millions of retail XRP holders who have never heard of Ripple but traded the digital currency for years.  The price of XRP plummeted.
  • On January 12, 2021, Acting Enforcement Director Marc Berger announced his resignation from the SEC, departing the agency at the end of the month.
  • As of March 2021, the People’s Bank of China (PBOC) had edged closer to the full-scale launch of their Digital Yuan, releasing millions of dollars of the digital currency in trials.
  • On March 29, 2021, Bloomberg reported that Clayton had accepted a position at One River Asset Management, a digital asset hedge fund focused exclusively on bitcoin and ether.
  • In its case against Ripple, SEC attorneys have been fighting tooth and nail not to adhere to the One River Asset Management subpoena, more than likely in an attempt to keep potentially incriminating evidence about Clayton’s compensation from coming to light.  
  • On April 15, 2021, Bloomberg reported that Berger was joining Hinman as a partner at Simpson Thacher.

Neither Clayton, nor Hinman, nor Berger, nor the SEC have disputed any of these facts or the chronology of how this all unfolded.  Any objective reading clearly suggests that these three had and/or currently retain financial interests linked to the officials’ actions they took at the SEC. 

Why haven’t these individuals, Simpson Thacher and One River been challenged to explain these facts? 

These facts suggest glaring improprieties, so why aren’t they being investigated? Given  cryptocurrencies total market capitalization swelling into trillions of dollars, if now is not the time to investigate, then when?

It is up to the millions of retail XRP holders, who were directly impacted by these actions, to demand answers if no one else will.

With Crypto, Congress, Not Agencies, Should Decide What’s Next

By Andrew Langer. April 27, 2021. (The American Spectator).

Alongside the public’s newly found fascination with cryptocurrencies (which only sometimes includes their attempts to try and understand what they are — a process for the teacher akin to trying to explain to an AARP member how to program a VCR back in the day), there is serious debate and discussion among scholars and policymakers about how to look at them and treat them for public policy purposes.

From a public policy perspective, the question centers essentially on assigning “crypto” to one of four different categories. Are they

  • Securities? Are they a tradeable “financial instrument” that create some kind of ownership right?
  • Commodities? Are they some kind of raw material gained through a resource-intensive extraction process?
  • Currencies? Are they some kind of unit of exchange backed by some kind of hard asset?
  • Something different entirely, requiring a whole new vocabulary or public policy approach?

All are being considered, and each approach has its adherents and detractors.

The most logical route would be to view cryptocurrency as an entirely new thing (which it is). It doesn’t easily fit into any of the preexisting categories — it’s somewhere, honestly, between a commodity and a currency. Many cryptocurrencies do require intense resource utilization, but they can immediately be used as a standard of exchange.

Read the Full Article Here.

The SEC Raised its Fist and Showed Its Contempt for Us. Today, We Answered.

By John E. Deaton, Founder and Host of CryptoLaw.

Five months ago, almost to the day, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed a lawsuit against Ripple but made it clear it was coming after everyone connected to XRP.  They ignored warnings that this lawsuit would cause serious harm to countless people.  There was never one phrase in the mountain of pages the SEC has filed since December 22, 2020 that showed one bit of consideration for the retail investors they are supposed to be defending by their every enforcement action. When we asked the court to hear our voice, the SEC scoffed and insulted us in their formal response, saying that all of us who suffered collateral damage from their ill-conceived lawsuit should remain silent.

Today, we answered them.

I have just filed our Motion to Intervene in the case of SEC v. Ripple, on behalf of an entire community of XRP holders, users, developers, content providers and the many small businesses that utilize the digital asset XRP as well as the XRP Ledger.   In short, I made it clear to the court that without our intervention, we are without a voice in a debate of great stakes for us and the holders of all digital assets in the United States.

When the SEC brought this lawsuit against Ripple and its two executives, it not only claimed that Ripple and its executives conducted an unprecedented eight-year continuous and ongoing coin offering, it also specifically alleged XRP itself to be an unregistered security and all of us who have traded it since 2013 have been engaged in unlawful trades.

This troubling claim is not disguised or otherwise difficult to find. In the first paragraph of their complaint, the SEC labels XRP itself as a “digital asset security.” The SEC claims that “from 2013 through the present, Defendants sold over 14.6 billion units of a digital asset security called XRP.” The SEC is alleging that any sale or transfer of XRP by any entity, business or individual is a violation of Section 5 of the Securities Act.  They also go further in saying that XRP has “no utility” other than as an investment contract in Ripple, despite the fact that a massive community of XRP users and developers has existed for years completely apart from that company.  Indeed, a huge segment of XRP holders had never heard of Ripple when the SEC accused them of having entered into a “common enterprise” with Ripple.  The absurdity and arrogance of this unrestrained, out-of-control regulator’s claims could not be further from the truth.  Their logic could only be sustained if the SEC was able to suppress any XRP retail holder from speaking up and telling our stories of how we use this digital currency in a variety of ways.

It should give all cryptocurrency holders and developers faith that the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York does not appear to be buying what the SEC is trying to sell in this case.  It has taken on the SEC’s lawyer over XRP’s utility as well as his preposterous argument that all sales of XRP are unregistered securities trades.  Best of all, the court has invited us to argue why we retail holders – those the SEC is supposed to be protecting – should intervene in the case.

For more than eight years, the SEC allowed XRP, the XRP ledger, and their associated technologies evolve from a promising digital asset with superior functionality into the third-largest digital currency in the world. The XRP of 2021 is very different than that of 2013. For these reasons, it is clear that those of us who hold and use XRP have a right to intervene in this case in order to adequately our interests. The very interests the SEC decided to dismiss when they filed their December complaint.

If the SEC is successful in its attack on Ripple and XRP, it will assume the authority to regulate and attack every other cryptocurrency in existence. The precedent set here become the new standard and no digital asset exchanges, developers, vendors, ordinary users, and retail holders of cryptocurrencies will be safe.  

It is now up to the court to decide whether we can join the case.  Nothing is guaranteed, and we must respect the judge’s ultimate decision.  But I’m proud and honored to have the trust and support of such a dynamic and innovative community of XRP holders who refused to back down when the government raised its fist and told us to be silent.

Cryptocurrency’s Future in the U.S. Is Threatened By SEC Action Against Ripple

By J. Carl Cecere. April 19, 2021. (Bloomberg Law).

Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Gary Gensler has an important opportunity to undo actions taken in the waning hours of the Trump administration that threaten cryptocurrency innovation.

Back in December, outgoing SEC Chair Jay Clayton brought an unprecedented enforcement action against the enterprise software company Ripple, creator of the digital currency XRP—which was the world’s third most popular cryptocurrency, but not anymore.

The SEC’s lawsuit seeks billions in penalties from Ripple Labs Inc. and its executives. But the agency does not allege that any of its investors were defrauded.

Read the Full Article Here.

Former SEC Director who led Ripple action lands new role at Ethereum law firm

By Samuel Wan. April 17, 2021. (CryptoSlate).

Ex-Acting Director of the Division of Enforcement, will join Simpson Thacher, a member of the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance, later this year. This leads some to ask whether a conflict of interest took place in the SEC granting Ethereum’s non-securities status.

According to news outlet Bloomberg, Marc Berger, who stepped down from his role at the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in January, will join New York-based Simpson Thacher in June. Berger was instrumental in bringing legal action against Ripple on allegations of selling an unregistered security in the XRP token.

A key point throughout the hearing process has been the SEC’s nod of approval towards both Bitcoin and Ethereum, which they deem as not securities. Questions are now being asked following Berger’s appointment at a member firm of the Enterprise Ethereum Alliance.

Read the Full Story Here.

The SEC’s Cryptocurrency Confusion

Regulators harm investors by filing suits before setting clear rules.

By The Editorial Board. The Wall Street Journal. April 16, 2021.

Cryptocurrencies are a new force in financial markets, but their emergence is following an old pattern, for better and worse. Wednesday saw a step toward institutionalizing their trade with the $86 billion public offering of Coinbase, the largest U.S. cryptocurrency exchange. But regulators are creating danger for currency developers and retail investors.

The uncertainty is on display in the Securities and Exchange Commission case against Ripple Labs, a digital currency issuer. The SEC in December charged Ripple with issuing $1.3 billion in unregistered securities, based on the company’s initial offering of its currency in 2013. The agency says Ripple’s efforts to promote and profit from its product qualify the currency as a security, subject to the restrictions that govern sales of equities.

Yet court findings in the discovery phase of the suit have highlighted the inconsistency of the SEC’s approach. In March federal Judge Analisa Torres told lawyers that Ripple “has a utility,” casting doubt on the SEC’s view that the tokens are principally a claim on future profits. And last week Magistrate Judge Sarah Netburn granted Ripple access to the SEC’s discussions of bitcoin and ether, the two largest cryptocurrencies, which the agency considers exempt from its rules.

Read the Full Editorial Here.