Despite FTX collapse Emmer continues to be a crypto booster MinnPost

Despite FTX collapse, Emmer continues to be a crypto booster

D. C. memo | One week's worth of Washington Political News, Journalism, and Opinon will be in mind what is important for Minnesota.

Washingto n-US Congress, the largest crypto booster, Tom Emmer, on Tuesday, continued to accuse Gary Gary Genuler, Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission, on the bankruptcy of the bankruptcy, FTX.

At the hearing of the House of Representatives Financial Service Committee on the collapse of FTX, the House of Representatives Emmer (sixth ward elected) agreement to hand over the internal communication between FTX and Gensler from FTX CEO John Ray III. I pulled it out. Ray is a professional in bankruptcy processing and will be in charge of rebuilding FTX.

"We can work with your staff to get what we need," Ray said.

Emmer complained that "Genler has also refused to answer our questions or appear in the committee," he had escalated the criticism of SEC for several weeks.

FTX's former CEO Sam Bankman Fried was supposed to be the main player on Tuesday, but was arrested in Bahamas on Monday evening. The Ministry of Justice, who called for Bankma n-Fried's detention, has prosecuted FTX's former CEO with eight causes, including telegraph fraud, conspiracy that deceive the United States, and violations of the Election Funding Law.

[Image_credit] Reuters/ Sara Sylviga [/ Image_credit] [Image_caption] CEO of the FTX group John J. Ray III is currently collapsed at the U. S. House of Representative Service Committee's hearing session on Tuesday. Investigating the collapse of the encryption exchange [/image_caption] FTX last month, about $ 8 billion of funds, were unknown, and the property of countless investors was lost, despite the surprising bankruptcy. , Emas and other members of the Diet continue to be encrypted booster.

"The future of the cipher reflects American culture," said Emmer.

Emmer is the c o-chair of Congress Blockchain Cocus. The blockchain is a technology that enables the existence of cryptocurrency, and according to Caucas's mission statement, the members say, "I understand the role that the parliament should fulfill its development."

"We have decided on a light touch regulation approach as a Cocus," said the mission statement.

The blockchain technology is distributed. It is said that the supporters are less likely to rot, leaving the centralized authority and shifting to a distributed network of the participants.

"We have strongly believed in the power of encrypted technology since the beginning of the lawmaker," said Michael McAdams, a spokesman, a spokesman.

Emmer is one of the members calling out to the donors to donate cryptocurrencies to their election campaign. Emmer has also promoted the donation of cryptocurrencies to the committee while serving as the chairman of the Republican National Council.

A few days after FTX broke down last month, Emmer gave a lecture at the Summit sponsored by the blockchain association in Washington.

"It is necessary to use the stage called Congress to advertise you across the wall of the Congress," said Emmer. "I need to understand more that people should not be afraid of this."

On Tuesday, he accused Gensler again about the collapse of FTX.

"Gensler knows that FTX was fraudulent from the beginning. Gensler knows that FTX has been fraudulent since its establishment. This is terrible, given that he has repeatedly held a meeting with Bankman Fried than anyone in this industry to discuss the framework of cryptography. I tweeted.

However, in March, Emmer led a blockchain Cocas colleague to send a letter from Secretary of SEC to refrain from imposing an excess jurisdiction and burden. Ta. The letter was sent after the SEC sent a questionnaire to the business practices to FTX and other encrypted companies.

Genshler has been criticized for being forced to expand overseas in countries with loose regulations that induce fraud because the regulations on US cryptographic companies were so poor. However, Emmer has not offered the basis of the claim that Gensler had been collusion with Bankman Fried.

FTX launched a business in Bahamas, but was deeply involved in trying to affect US policy creators, like other cipher companies.

Emmer has received thousands of election dates, including Ryan Sarame, a former c o-operator (CEO) of FTX, including $ 8, 700. Sarame has also donated $ 52, 700 to NRCC led by Emas.

Emmer is not the only member of the Minnesota Council who received the FT X-related donation. Angie Craig, the second ward, received $ 5, 000 from Bankman Fried. FTX's former CEO has donated $ 780 to the Democratic Labor Party in Minnesota.

Open Secrets has confirmed more than $ 65 million political donations related to FTX.

However, FTX seems to have spread more political funds. Bankma n-Fried said, in many interviews that the company collapsed, many "dark money" (funded to a specific no n-profit political organization that does not need to disclose the donation). He said he had fled to the group.

On Tuesday, Federal Authority charged Bankma n-Fried in a crime of making illegal political donations to the Democratic and Republican Party of the Democratic and Republican Party using illegally diverted customer funds. He said he provided funds to affect regulations in the cryptocurrency industry.

Bankma n-Fried supported the Independent Organization's Product Future Transaction Committee as a major regulatory organization in the cryptocurrency spot market.

‘Old fashioned embezzlement’

At a public hearing on Tuesday, Mr. Rei (a new FTX CEO, which specializes in rebuilding a problem company, including the energy trading company Enron), is a roadmap for finding a final solution for FTX customers and creditors. He said that the plan was started on November 11.

"However, this is the first time in my career that corporate control has been completely lost at all levels of organizations, from lack of financial statements to complete lack of internal control and governance. "Ray testified.

Ray said there was no firewall between Alameda, an encryption hedge fund in the FTX group. According to Rei, the FTX Group's funds and about 500 investments involved in assets were not encrypted and security, and they had not been fully documented. And the executive of FTX was "playing" using customer money.

It was a "traditional embezzlement case."

However, despite the alleged fraud at FTX, McHenry said, "I believe in the future of people around the world built with digital assets and blockchain technology." Open Shirets confirmed more than $ 65 million political donations related to FTX.

Bankma n-Fried supported the Independent Organization's Product Future Transaction Committee as a major regulatory organization in the cryptocurrency spot market.

MinnPost articles like this one are available paywall-free 365 days a year.

Join the Conversation

It was a "traditional embezzlement case."

However, despite the alleged fraud at FTX, McHenry said, "I believe in the future of people around the world built with digital assets and blockchain technology." Open Secrets has confirmed more than $ 65 million political donations related to FTX.

On Tuesday, Federal Authority charged Bankma n-Fried in a crime of illegal political donation to the Democratic and Republican candidates using illegally diverted customer funds. He said he provided funds to affect regulations in the cryptocurrency industry.

Representative Patrick McHenry (elected North Carolina) will be the chairman of the House of Representatives Finance Service Committee when the Republican Party will take over the House of Representatives in the next parliament. He has pledged to continue using his committee to continue investigating the collapse of FTX. At a public hearing on Tuesday, Mr. Rei (a new FTX CEO, which specializes in rebuilding a problem company, including the energy trading company Enron), is a roadmap for finding a final solution for FTX customers and creditors. He said that the plan was started on November 11. Representative Patrick McHenry (elected North Carolina) will be the chairman of the House of Representatives Finance Service Committee when the Republican Party will take over the House of Representatives in the next parliament. He has pledged to continue using his committee to continue investigating the collapse of FTX.

It was a "traditional embezzlement case."

However, despite the alleged fraud at FTX, McHenry said, "I believe in the future of people around the world built with digital assets and blockchain technology."

Emmer is likely to become a subcommittee chair when the Financial Services Committee is reconstituted in January. She will also become the third-highest-ranking House Republican majority leader, giving her more influence as Congress considers crypto-related legislation.

In addition to investigating the causes of FTX's decline, the new Congress is likely to introduce new crypto-related legislation.

"Whether we like it or not, we are moving into a crypto world.

As a non-profit newsroom, we rely on donations from our readers. Please donate today to help us keep our news free for everyone.

Tags News

Charles Thompson talks

Crypto? Is it like the Republican health care plan? Pay for your chance...

Dan Buechler says:

Tyler Cowen of George Mason Marginal Revolution says, "It's a new type of computer. A new kind of legal system. And a new way to achieve reliable decentralized consensus!

Dan Buechler says:

Scott Alexander of Astral Codex 10 is not against crypto. It's proven useful in Vietnam and India.

Dan Buechler says:

Newshour is a pro on regulated crypto.

dan buechler He says:

I personally am against cryptocurrencies and still support fiat. But there are real benefits to cryptocurrencies now and in the future, especially in other countries. If I continue to study crypto, it may work in its favor.

Dan Buechler says: It's one of those weird things that's happened in politics that a congressman from rural Minnesota would choose to get involved in an exotic financial product. Bitcoin is something that should be a million miles away. Harris Goldstein says:

There's nothing weird about it: "Emmer has received thousands of dollars in campaign contributions from that industry, including $8, 700 from Ryan Salameh, former co-CEO of FTX. Salameh also donated $52, 700 to the NRCC, which Emmer leads. "In many interviews he gave after his company went bankrupt, Bankman Fried said he was a huge donor to Republican organizations. But now Emmer has turned around and said the SEC is not doing enough because it's too strict. Being a congressman must be the easiest job in the world, except for fundraising. No accountability, not even for what you said the day before.

It was a "traditional embezzlement case."

Hey. I am a sarcasm, but the advantage of cryptocurrencies for politicians is that cryptocurrencies are more difficult to track than actual money. If you can stick to it, there are many ways to benefit those who benefit from the decayed system. Like a politician. Also, "stunning collapse" is exaggerated. Amazing suggests an unpredictable element. I'm not surprised at the collapse of FTX. Crypto has enough money to get comfort, but is hired by people who do not have enough knowledge to gain comfort based on their own experience. These people are easily deceived. And where there is a duck, there is a Peten teacher who makes a profit using ducks. This is even more so where there are few supervision and greedy culture.

Dan Buechler says: Minnesota's sixth constituency is not as "countryside" as you think. It contains some suburbs, small cent cloud metropolitan areas (compared to twin City), and many small towns. The population ratio is 36 % in the countryside and 64 % are urban. If you rank in urbanized area, 54 % vs. 46 % will certainly have a large number of rural land, but people will vote instead of rocks or cows. If the constituency of the Minnesota Congress is characterized, two are urban areas, two are clearly suburban (20 to 29 % are rural areas), and two are "rural areas" (62 % and 66 % are rural areas). The sixth constituency is a transition from the suburbs to rural areas, along with the first constituency, which is a rural area. http://proximital. htm Elsa Mac says:

People who have money in cryptocurrency try to buy other people a cryptocurrency. Buy a little and try to increase the number of people you want. It's a mouse course.

Dennis Tester says:

Bankman Fried was arrested and detained just a few hours before the Congress testified. No one wants to hear his story. Firing Emmer revealed Gensler's personal schedule and found that he had met Bankman Fried, George Solos, and Hillary Clinton. Hmm.

Audrey Wicklow says:

"The billionaire Oligal Hi was arrested and closed? Is this Russia?

Millions (billions?) of dollars from Ukraine to FTX? Just as the money laundering scheme was about to be exposed, all of a sudden someone has him arrested and detained.

Are you saying he shouldn't have been arrested? I thought you were a law and order guy, but apparently not. A courtroom seems like the perfect place to "listen" to what you're looking for.

Dan Buechler says:

Arrest him after he gives his testimony under oath. Criminal Investigation 101

Elsa Mac says: Oh my goodness! I'm meeting former Senator, former Secretary of State, former Democratic Congresswoman. Hillary Clinton, former Senator, former Secretary of State, former Democratic Presidential candidate who won the popular vote in 2016.....! Heavens forbid! Hiram Foster says:

The main concern with cryptocurrencies is that if they collapse, the broader market will collapse with them. Thankfully, when cryptocurrencies collapsed, the broader market seemed to be largely unaffected. Until now. What I found interesting about cryptocurrencies is that they are like fiat money without fiat money. A completely unbacked currency seemed to appeal to people who think existing currencies are insufficiently backed. It didn't make sense to me.

Dan Buechler says:

I agree. That's why I never bought into it.

In addition to investigating the causes of FTX's decline, the new Congress is likely to introduce new crypto-related legislation.

My feeling for Crypto is that it will start at a value of $0 and will end at a value of $0. Personally, I'm staying out of this rise and fall. It's a social media mess that's out of control.

dan buechler He says:

If people on the left want to keep getting tax revenue and social engineering with the tax code, the government has to have a crypto policy. Of course, I enjoy getting the opportunity to make some scathing comments to Mr. Emmer, but crypto is probably not dead and the US government will need policies to deal with it. Emmer is working on that.

Harris Goldstein says:

It's laughable to dismiss left-wing social engineering, but incredibly naive to dismiss right-wing social engineering.

Audrey Wicklow says:

You're both right. Crypto is against property and leads to social credit. Same with China. We've been following their standards for a while, but to a lesser extent. Is it wrong to have 1. 3 billion people under one political party?

Audrey Wicklow says: See President Meloni Idi's comments on cas h-t o-EU electronic remittance. Both sides have a negotiation perspective. Is there a middle point? The EU is much more powerful, so probably not. Banki and tax collectors always win. As a non-profit newsroom, we rely on donations from our readers. Please donate today to help us keep our news free for everyone.

At present, FTX's donation to the Republican Party seems to be less than donations to the Democratic Party. It is hundreds of thousands of dollars for $ 40 million. This was not in the article.

Robert Weer says: You support the power. John Kingstad says:

No, that's not the case, but FTX seems to have spread more political funds. " Bankma n-Fried said, in many interviews that the company received after bankruptcy, many "Dark money" (funded to a specific no n-profit political organization that does not need to disclose donors). He said he had flown to the group. "Dark money" right wing, "maintenance money. Crypto means" hidden "and" hidden ". How many of the parliamentary parliament, which is dominated by Ember and the Republican Party, investigates the "cryptocurrency" of the amount of money used in the "independent expenditure" in the election? Ember and his colleagues poured billions of dollars into the political campaign and lobby activity "Think tank", and who donated the donors to the ta x-exempt organizations and the network of the Foundation, which hide their donors from the eyes of the public monitoring. You may need to investigate. You may find it all the same.

Audrey Wicklow says:

Democratic donations surpass the Republican Party. This is what we know. You need to go from what you have, and my observation is accurate. Even if there is "dark money", it is not known whether it was provided to the GOP. This is a claim by Bankman Fried, and he says anything to distract from the incident. This is now a Democratic scandal.

Audrey Wicklow says: Democratic scandal? What is the basis? Have you received an ostensible donation? About the back money? Who defends the cipher? Don't you know Tom Emmer? Audrey Wicklow says: Audrey Wicklow says: Charles Thompson talks

Robert Weer says:

As a non-profit newsroom, we rely on donations from our readers. Please donate today to help us keep our news free for everyone.

John Kingstad says:

Audrey Wicklow says:

Rachel Curler says:

As a non-profit newsroom, we rely on donations from our readers. Please donate today to help us keep our news free for everyone.

Cart Nelson says: President Meloni Ido's comment on cas h-t o-EU electronic remittance. Both sides have a negotiation perspective. Is there a middle point? The EU is much more powerful, so probably not. Banki and tax collectors always win.

Audrey Wicklow says: At present, FTX's donation to the Republican Party seems to be less than donations to the Democratic Party. It is hundreds of thousands of dollars for $ 40 million. This was not in the article. Representative Patrick McHenry (elected North Carolina) will be the chairman of the House of Representatives Finance Service Committee when the Republican Party will take over the House of Representatives in the next parliament. He has pledged to continue using his committee to continue investigating the collapse of FTX.

You support the power.

Audrey Wicklow says: No, that's not the case, but FTX seems to have spread more political funds. " Bankma n-Fried said, in many interviews that the company received after bankruptcy, many "dark money" (funded to a specific no n-profit political organization that does not need to disclose the donation). He said he had flown to the group. "Dark money" right wing, "maintenance money. Crypto means" hidden "and" hidden ". How many of the parliamentary parliament, which is dominated by Ember and the Republican Party, investigates the "cryptocurrency" of the amount of money used in the "independent expenditure" in the election? Ember and his colleagues poured billions of dollars into the political campaign and lobby activity "Think tank", and who donated the donors to the ta x-exempt organizations and the network of the Foundation, which hide their donors from the eyes of the public monitoring. You may need to investigate. You may find it all the same. Representative Patrick McHenry (elected North Carolina) will be the chairman of the House of Representatives Finance Service Committee when the Republican Party will take over the House of Representatives in the next parliament. He has pledged to continue using his committee to continue investigating the collapse of FTX.

Audrey Wicklow says: Democratic scandal? What is the basis? Have you received an ostensible donation? About the back money? Who defends the cipher? Don't you know Tom Emmer? Audrey Wicklow says:

He scooped well. It would not be news that Bankman Fried had funded more Democrats than other political parties, but he said he had provided a lot of funds to the Democratic Party. In a previous comment, you claimed that he was a billionaire rigalho, but instead he understood that he understood, despite not understanding the cipher, and invested a large number of amateurs. Only a man. His law professor's parents (both of which are the Faculty of Law at Stanford University) must be very proud of their son.

Audrey Wicklow says:

The pampered kid that has been managed by FTX is "Black money", almost all donations and no way to know who donated and what. He has announced the support of the Democratic candidates, but it is interesting to find that the Republican candidate needs to be hidden.

Frank Ferran says:

Do you include a desk on the righ t-handed desk on the right? Oh, I can't do that.

Dan Buechler says:

It's not a desk money, but a dark money.

As a non-profit newsroom, we rely on donations from our readers. Please donate today to help us keep our news free for everyone.

"Now" dark money is not explained accurately. Do you know if a civil lawsuit can ultimately expose, including donations from FTX executives?

In addition to investigating the causes of FTX's decline, the new Congress is likely to introduce new crypto-related legislation.

Will the prominent Republican members again run over their responsibilities?

Frank Ferran says: You're shifting smoothly from Waltz's accusation to Gensler's accusation. Did you notice that you always blame your opponent? Neither SBF nor Tom Brady's recommendation, Rally David's commercial. Do you remember Jerry Sign Feld often saying "Newman!" Let's say the same resentment with me: "Gensler!" Audrey Wicklow says:

Emmer also took another tactic. At first, Trump, then line 3, bronch o-sulfide, and this time it is a cryptocien scam. He will be confused, r e-elected the voters in the unknown iron range, and will continue to bother those who should be representative with their own greed.

Frank Ferran says: You need to learn where the iron range is. Hiram Foster says:

I'm sorry, I got confused with Stauber ... "Weather Bird" ...

It was a "traditional embezzlement case."

Emmer is a representative of the 6th ward, including St. Cloud, northwest of the twin city.

As a non-profit newsroom, we rely on donations from our readers. Please donate today to help us keep our news free for everyone.

Suburban Blaine is the second largest city in the district that includes Anoka. https://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Minnesota%27s_6th_congressional_district

In addition to investigating the causes of FTX's decline, the new Congress is likely to introduce new crypto-related legislation.

It's highly unlikely that FTX is the only scam in the crypto world. None of them are revenue-generating "products." None of them have any inherent value, they're just a bunch of fabricated bits. Blockchain technology is interesting, but so far it hasn't found any major use beyond anonymizing the transactions of people who do business on the dark web. Emmer's support for the technology is a bit confusing. He seems to want to regulate the industry with a "light touch," but he also seems to want to blame the SEC for failing to prevent FTX from failing. Now, which is it? Frankly, I don't think it's the SEC's problem. The SEC doesn't regulate casinos like crypto exchanges. The best way to avoid losing money is to not play.

Elsa Mac says:

Emmer, and many others on the far right, always believe they know more than they do. They have a hard time suppressing that belief. And it is rarely worth having that belief. The question for Emmer would be: "How much have you personally invested in Bitcoin? How much Bitcoin has been donated to your designated or preferred campaigns?" This might answer his position and motivation. I am also curious to know what the Congressional Committees of January 6th have found out about the financing of the "insurrection" and when or if it will be revealed. I recall that similar information was not made public after the 1933 insurrection in Washington DC.

Audrey Wicklow says:

There are many in-depth analyses of the crypto world, but I like Bloomberg's overview (it's worth the subscription fee): https://www. bloomberg. com/features/2022-the-crypto-story/? leadSource=uverify%20wall The crypto world has its own "news" source. Just a few months ago, Emmer made headlines when he claimed that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), which regulates other investments, has no authority over crypto. The "AMBCrypto" website claims to be an independent news source for the crypto industry. It would need a good editor. Hint: Emmer is a Representative, not a Senator. Is this the best inside information for cryptographers? "Emmer: SEC cracking down for 'unconstitutionally expanding its jurisdiction'" July 21, 2022 "Senator Tom Emmer has made waves by claiming that the US SEC is still aggressively pursuing cryptocurrency entities. In doing so, the SEC has exceeded its authority, he added." https://ambcrypto. com/emmer-sec-using-enforcement-to-unconstitutionally-expand-its-jurisdiction/ Question: Would you entrust your life savings to a technocrat who doesn't even know the difference between a representative and a senator? No wonder they have a hard time figuring out whether the money was supposed to be in a cryptocurrency exchange (personal account) or money that flowed into a crypto hedge fund run by their girlfriend. They also had a hard time tracking how much money went into publicly disclosed Democratic contributions and hidden Republican dark money. Glad they're good. BK Anderson says:

It was a "traditional embezzlement case."

Dan Buehler says:

Audrey Wicklow says: Frank Phelan says: It was a "traditional embezzlement case."

Dan Buehler says:

Audrey Wicklow says:

BK Anderson says:

Audrey Wicklow says: Frank Phelan says: No, that's not the case, but FTX seems to have spread more political funds. " Bankma n-Fried said, in many interviews that the company received after bankruptcy, many "Dark money" (funded to a specific no n-profit political organization that does not need to disclose donors). He said he had flown to the group. "Dark money" right wing, "maintenance money. Crypto means" hidden "and" hidden ". How many of the parliamentary parliament, which is dominated by Ember and the Republican Party, investigates the "cryptocurrency" of the amount of money used in the "independent expenditure" in the election? Ember and his colleagues poured billions of dollars into the political campaign and lobby activity "Think tank", and who donated the donors to the ta x-exempt organizations and the network of the Foundation, which hide their donors from the eyes of the public monitoring. You may need to investigate. You may find it all the same.

BK Anderson comment

It was a "traditional embezzlement case."

Richard Owens says:

A story about Bitcoin and monkeys: There were many monkeys living near a village. One day, a merchant came to the village to buy monkeys. He said he would buy them for $100 each. The villagers thought the merchant was crazy. There was no way he could buy a stray monkey for $100 each. Still, some people caught a few monkeys and gave them to the merchant. The news spread like wildfire, and more people caught monkeys and sold them to the merchant. A few days later, the merchant declared that he would buy the monkeys for $200 each. The lazy villagers also ran around to catch the remaining monkeys and sold them for $200 each. Then the merchant said that he would buy the monkeys for $500 each. The villagers could not sleep! The villagers were sleep-deprived and caught six or seven monkeys. The villagers were anxiously waiting for the next news. Then the merchant said that he was going home for a week and that when he returned, he would buy the monkeys for $1000 each. He asked his employee to take care of the monkeys he bought. When the merchant returned home, the villagers were very sad. So the employee said he would secretly sell them for $700 each. This news spread like wildfire. The merchant would buy the monkeys for $1000 each, so he would make a profit of $300 for each monk. Dennis Tester says:

The clue here is that Bankman Freed "combined" (transferred) Bitcoin client funds into his own hedge fund account. Clearly preparing to fly out of town.

Implementing an Effective Cryptoasset Regulatory Framework in the Unites States

Joe Ormsby says:

I also noticed the term "co-mingled funds". I thought I understood the basic concept, but Wikipedia's explanation was helpful... "In law, commingling is a breach of trust whereby a trustee commingles funds held for clients with his own funds, making it difficult to determine which funds belong to the trustee and which belong to the client. This is particularly problematic when funds are invested and profits and losses from the investment must be allocated. In such cases, the law usually presumes that profits belong to the client and losses belong to the trustor. According to one source, "In a pejorative sense, commingling is a special vice whereby a trustee (trustee, agent, lawyer, etc.) fails to keep the funds of the beneficiary separate from the trustee's own funds" [1]. The funds held are not the property of the trustee, and the client is not a creditor. So in case of bankruptcy, if the funds were properly segregated they could easily be returned to their clients. But if the funds were commingled, the clients could be caught up in bankruptcy proceedings and they may not have enough funds to pay their clients back. " https://en. wikipedia. org/wiki/Commingling

Rachel Kahler says:

Part III: Implementing an Effective Cryptoasset Regulatory Framework in the US”

More worse, most cryptocurrencies consume energy to "generate". Most cryptocurrencies consumed energy to "generate", and given that the processing capacity increased for each generated coin, only the first several villagers actually made money. Later, the villagers made a trap to caught monkeys by looting resources from other villagers. Even the most energ y-efficient cryptocurrency requires valuable power for its generation. Bitcoin consumes more energy than the energy used by many countries in "mining". Conversely, it is not environmentally friendly because it requires power in power and has no unique value. At present, Etrium has only used 0. 01 terrawatt time a year. However, this is the average of 906 power consumption of Minnesota people per year, decreasing from the amount of energy in the Minnesota as a whole due to changes in algorithms. Due to the nature of the proof of work requirements of the blockchain, the amount of energy for each transaction is still increasing. And because most encryption mining is performed, its energy is dirty energy.

Richard Owens says:

I agree!

BK Anderson says:

That's right. That's why this business is a (obvious) fraud. Originally, it should be regulated or legislated, but it is treated as a legal new industry for some reason because it can spread millions of dollars election funds. It's a terrible story.

Paul Udostrand says:

There is no one here who thinks that Republican members will easily abandon magical thoughts, right?

John Kingstad says: Most worse, most cryptocurrencies consume energy to "generate". Most cryptocurrencies consumed energy to "generate", and given that the processing capacity increased for each generated coin, only the first several villagers actually made money. Later, the villagers made a trap to caught monkeys by looting resources from other villagers. Even the most energ y-efficient cryptocurrency requires valuable power for its generation. Bitcoin consumes more energy than the energy used by many countries in "mining". Conversely, it is not environmentally friendly because it requires power in power and has no unique value. At present, Etrium has only used 0. 01 terrawatt time a year. However, this is the average of 906 power consumption of Minnesota people per year, decreasing from the amount of energy in the Minnesota as a whole due to changes in algorithms. Due to the nature of the proof of work requirements of the blockchain, the amount of energy for each transaction is still increasing. And because most encryption mining is performed, its energy is dirty energy.

Richard Owens says:

Part IV: Conclusion

INTRODUCTION

I agree!

BK Anderson says:

Paul Udostrand says:

There is no one here who thinks that Republican members will easily abandon magical thoughts, right?

John Kingstad says: More worse, most cryptocurrencies consume energy to "generate". Most cryptocurrencies consumed energy to "generate", and given that the processing capacity increased for each generated coin, only the first several villagers actually made money. Later, the villagers made a trap to caught monkeys by looting resources from other villagers. Even the most energ y-efficient cryptocurrency requires valuable power for its generation. Bitcoin consumes more energy than the energy used by many countries in "mining". Conversely, it is not environmentally friendly because it requires power in power and has no unique value. At present, Etrium has only used 0. 01 terrawatt time a year. However, this is the average of 906 power consumption of Minnesota people per year, decreasing from the amount of energy in the Minnesota as a whole due to changes in algorithms. Due to the nature of the proof of work requirements of the blockchain, the amount of energy for each transaction is still increasing. And because most encryption mining is performed, its energy is dirty energy.

I. A CROSS-JURISDICTIONAL COMPARISON OF CRYPTOASSET REGULATORY FRAME

Richard Owens says:

1. The United States

I agree!

a. Trading platforms

BK Anderson says:

Paul Udostrand says:

There is no one here who thinks that Republican members will easily abandon magical thoughts, right?

b. Broker-dealers

John Kingstad says:

Article 1, Section 8 of the United States Constitution said in the Federal Congress, "cast money, regulate its value, and regulate the value of foreign currency. It is interpreted as being able to establish a "unexpected banknote" consisting of a printed banknote. It defines the currency we already have, without considering bitcoin and other fraud, and is summarized in Richard Owens's pleasant "monkey parable." (It may be the 2008 financial crisis, the Nankai bubble, or the financial crisis that occurred in the meantime). This article is suitable for clarifying how members of the Diet do not know about money and currency and how to learn. Tostein Vebulen in 1923, the money that was at the time of the gold standard was ironic that it was "officially recognized," based on the government's "all trust and trust". Under the "bill" system, it is more applicable to today. Aside from Bitcoin's "cryptocurrency", how many of Japan's currency in Japan is created by "concealed currency" or "Dark Money" for politicians and bribery systems. Is it based on the "full trust and credit" of the "cryptocurrency"? Before this parliament creates a new law to provide the power of monetary manufacturing to this dubious new "cryptocurrency industry", we should consider the following:

c. Issuances

Hilam Foster says: The United States Constitution, Section 8, "the Federal Congress" covers money, regulates its value, and regulates the value of foreign money. " It is interpreted that the borrowed clause means that the parliament can establish a "unexplored banknote" made of banknotes printed with a national bank. It defines the currency we already have, without considering bitcoin and other fraud, and is summarized in Richard Owens's pleasant "monkey parable." (It may be the 2008 financial crisis, the Nankai bubble, or the financial crisis that occurred in the meantime). This article is suitable for clarifying how members of the Diet do not know about money and currency and how to learn. Tostein Vebulen in 1923, the money that was at the time of the gold standard was ironic that it was "officially recognized," based on the government's "all trust and trust". Under the "banknote" system, it applies more to today than at that time. Aside from Bitcoin's "cryptocurrency", how many of Japan's currency in Japan is created by "concealed currency" or "Dark Money" for politicians and bribery systems. Is it based on the "full trust and credit" of the "cryptocurrency"? Before this parliament creates a new law to provide the power of monetary manufacturing to this dubious new "cryptocurrency industry", we should consider the following:

Hilam Foster says: Article 1, 8, Section 8 of the United States Constitution "is" casting money, regulating its value, and regulating the value of foreign money. " It is interpreted that the parliament can establish a "unexpected banknote" made of banknotes printed with a national bank. It defines the currency we already have, without considering bitcoin and other fraud, and is summarized in Richard Owens's pleasant "monkey parable." (It may be the 2008 financial crisis, the Nankai bubble, or the financial crisis that occurred in the meantime). This article is suitable for clarifying how members of the Diet do not know about money and currency and how to learn. Tostein Vebulen in 1923, the money that was at the time of the gold standard was ironic that it was "officially recognized," based on the government's "all trust and trust". Under the "bill" system, it is more applicable to today. Aside from Bitcoin's "cryptocurrency", how many of Japan's currency in Japan is created by "concealed currency" or "Dark Money" for politicians and bribery systems. Is it based on the "full trust and credit" of the "cryptocurrency"? Before this parliament creates a new law to provide the power of monetary manufacturing to this dubious new "cryptocurrency industry", we should consider the following:

d. Derivatives

Hyram Foster says:

2. Japan

Just because the government can make money does not mean that others can't make money. For example, European governments and banks manufacture the euro. If the government, banks, and others make money and send them to the commercial world, the creator will not be able to manage the money. The dollar banknotes in your wallet cannot be canceled by Congress or the Ministry of Finance. Cryptocurrency is a form of money that is not a dollar. Many money is like this. The British pound is not a dollar, and so is the euro. Such a form and other coins can be regulated by Congress, but Congress cannot move international financial markets and other countries. Congress cannot move international financial markets and other countries. In fact, the issues of cryptocurrency are not much different from other problems traded in the international market. Basically, if the currency is complicated, it will not be subject to tax or at least the tax will be difficult. In this regard, the 87, 000 NTA investigators who want to hire a new Biden are afraid of Emmer and others, not grandmothers they want to sell sofas, but do not enter prison. Focus on election funders who want to evade tax. I'm looking forward to seeing Emmer's explanations on what benefits all this will bring his constituencies.

a. Trading platforms

Joe Ohmsby says:

"87, 000 NTA investigators who want to hire Biden. 87, 000 are scheduled to be adopted in 10 years, and many have succeeded retirees and have work other than investigators. In all, IRS could increase the number of employees of about 20, 000 to 30, 000 from the new funds, "Trump's alliance is enough to return the staff of the taxation agency about 10 years ago. "Time, August 9, 2022 https://time. com/6204928/IRS-87000- AGENTS-FACTCHECK-BIDEN/

Rachel curlers say:

You will not hear from Emmer because he avoids conversations with voters who do not agree 100% with his campaign messages. If he responds to emails, or if any of his minions respond to emails, it will be a bland formula that even Minnesotans would need to spice up if his emails were potted meat. Of course, if you are not his yes man (which may be exactly the opposite), the only way to "talk" to him is by email, and only through a portal with character limits. I think it makes sense that communication with him should be character limited.

Robert Weir says:

Oh my goodness. Crypto. People invested heavily in numbers that they somehow thought were valuable. People lost their jobs and became crypto traders. How did this happen?

BK Anderson says:

Exactly. Do you see the benefit of the government meaningfully regulating capitalism, especially financial markets?

Hiram Foster says:

b. Broker-dealers

The appeal of cryptography is puzzling to me. It seems wrapped up in a conservative political view of what money is. People seem to want money that is independent of government, government policies, or the banking system. You see the term fiat currency, which seems to assume that money has value only because the government has issued a command or inaction. Our Constitution provides that the value of money is regulated by Congress. Despite being modern, our lawmakers seem largely unaware of Adam Smith's work and insights. Money has value because we think it has value. Why we think it is irrelevant, so long as we think it is.

c. Issuance

BK Anderson says:

In the time of Adam Smith and the Founders, currency was backed by gold and precious metals.

Hiram Foster says:

No, for one thing the Founders didn't have access to much gold. And for another, they didn't issue currency. In colonial and early America, there were many currencies in circulation, issued by various entities. Keep in mind that this was a time when European currencies were common and news took a month, or even months, to travel from Europe to America.

d. Derivatives

BK Anderson says:

3. The European Union

The British pound has been silver-backed for a century, and the US adopted silver as a backing in the First Mint and Coinage Act of 1792. Perhaps there were more nuances in the late 18th century that I am not aware of. The "gold standard" came after the UK in 1819. But as you point out, of course US and world currencies have been fiat for 100 years, with no currency backed by anything other than the "faith and faith" of the Treasury. Yes, "crypto" also only has "value" if people are willing to hold it and accept it. Given these massive frauds and scandals, the proposition going forward seems dubious. But fools and their "money" soon part!

Frank Phelan says:

Well, yes, but fools and money can have a lot of fun before they part.

Comment from Brian Simon

a. Trading platforms

As Senator Emmer said, "The future of crypto reflects American culture." This means there will always be a demand for get-rich-quick schemes in the country.

Hiram Foster says:

The future of money depends on many things. Gold is good, but remember that gold is not edible in times of famine.

b. Broker-dealers

3. US customers and investors are at risk of fraud and losses.

c. Issuance

1. Establish a workable registration framework for crypto trading platforms, broker-dealers and custody providers.

2. Develop strict but flexible custody requirements specific to crypto assets.

3. Allow hybrid crypto-securities and non-securities services.

4. Allow disintermediated trading with safeguards.

d. Derivatives

5. Clearly define parameters to determine which crypto assets require regulation, which regulations apply, and whether regulatory treatment may change over time.

4. Hong Kong

6. Develop crypto-specific disclosure rules.

a. Trading platforms

7. Avoid stifling non-financial uses of crypto assets.

8. Provide legal guardrails for regulatory discretion.

9. Compare existing US legislative proposals

This report is the second of two reports by the international financial system program specializing in cryptocounter assets. The first series was published in February 2023 (the "1st Report") and outlined the Crypto Asset regulations in the United States. This report explains how other judicial jurisdictions have begun to introduce more effective regulations on issuing, trading, and custodi, and are not effective in the United States. Propose a reform that identifies the cost of the U. S. market and investors, and can r e-position the United States as a leader in the cryptographic asset regulation structure.

The U. S. government recognizes that the rise of Crypto Asset will create opportunities to strengthen US leadership in global financial markets and technology frontier. By providing clear restrictions to the crypto asset sector, the number and type of available crypto assets are expanding over time, and the Crypto Asset Market participants around the United States and the world are in the US economy. You will be able to keep entrusting your funds.

This report consists of three parts:

b. Broker-dealers

Part 1 compares the current status of crypto asset restrictions in the United States with the four major laws that have taken a major step toward the Crypto Asse t-only regulation system: (1) Japan, (2) Hong Kong. , (4) Britain. He also has a brief review of the three other countries and regions ((1) Australia, (2) Singapore, (4) the United Arab Emirates), which has taken a meaningful step toward the same framework. Based on this comparison, the United States has become largely in other areas in the introduction of cryptographic assets and encrypted assets providers, the introduction of regulatory structures that promote cryptographic assets, trading, and custodi. You can see that you are behind. This report is the second of two reports by the International Financial System Program specialized in encrypted assets. The first series was published in February 2023 (the "1st Report") and outlined the Crypto Asset regulations in the United States. This report explains how other judicial jurisdictions have begun to introduce more effective regulations on issuing, trading, and custodi, and are not effective in the United States. Propose a reform that identifies the cost of the U. S. market and investors, and can r e-position the United States as a leader in the cryptographic asset regulation structure.

c. Issuance

This report consists of three parts:

d. Derivatives

Part 1 compares the current status of crypto asset restrictions in the United States with the four major laws that have taken a major step toward the Crypto Asse t-only regulation system: (1) Japan, (2) Hong Kong. , (4) Britain. He also has a brief review of the three other countries and regions ((1) Australia, (2) Singapore, (4) the United Arab Emirates), which has taken a meaningful step toward the same framework. Based on this comparison, the United States has become largely in other areas in the introduction of cryptographic assets and encrypted assets providers, the introduction of regulatory structures that promote cryptographic assets, trading, and custodi. You can see that you are behind. This report is the second of two reports by the international financial system program specializing in cryptocounter assets. The first series was published in February 2023 (the "1st Report") and outlined the Crypto Asset regulations in the United States. This report explains how other judicial jurisdictions have begun to introduce more effective regulations on issuing, trading, and custodi, and are not effective in the United States. Propose a reform that identifies the cost of the U. S. market and investors, and can r e-position the United States as a leader in the cryptographic asset regulation structure.

5. The United Kingdom

a. Trading platforms

This report consists of three parts:

Part II will clarify the current and future costs of the US market due to the lack of an effective cryptocation regulation framework. In this paper, the percentage of global encryption asset transactions on the US trading platform and the proportion of assets issued in the United States are significantly declining and decreasing compared to traditional financial markets. It presents data indicating, restricts the ability to participate in these markets, and decreases the ability to supervise and regulate cryptographic assets. Is shown. In the United States, the uncertainty of regulations continues, indicating that other economic benefits related to encrypted employment, business, tax revenue, and encryption assets will be lost and will continue to be lost. 。 In addition, domestic encrypted asset trading platforms and other service providers comply with US laws, including fraud, prevention of money laundering, related state law regulations, and voluntarily implement more strict customer protection. Nevertheless, many US investors use the gaps in regulations, rely on services providers that do not comply with similar criteria, and have suffered fraud and failure.

b. Broker-dealers

Part III proposes a reform that positions the United States at the forefront of the encryption asset regulation structure. These reforms include the construction of an executable framework for registration and management of the cryptoci asset trading platform, clarifying the status of cryptographic assets, and introducing executable Castrment requirements. Some proposals require new legislation, but also includes suggestions on how to start dealing with US regulators until the necessary legislation is enacted. I am. Part II will clarify the current and future costs of the US market due to the lack of an effective encryption asset regulation framework. In this paper, the percentage of global encryption asset transactions on the US trading platform and the proportion of assets issued in the United States are significantly declining and decreasing compared to traditional financial markets. It presents data indicating, restricts the ability to participate in these markets, and decreases the ability to supervise and regulate cryptographic assets. Is shown. In the United States, the uncertainty of regulations continues, indicating that other economic benefits related to encrypted employment, business, tax revenue, and encryption assets will be lost and will continue to be lost. 。 In addition, domestic encrypted asset trading platforms and other service providers comply with US laws, including fraud, prevention of money laundering, related state law regulations, and voluntarily implement more strict customer protection. Nevertheless, many US investors use the gaps in regulations, rely on services providers that do not comply with similar criteria, and have suffered fraud and failure.

c. Issuance

Part III proposes a reform that positions the United States at the forefront of the encryption asset regulation structure. These reforms include the construction of an executable framework for registration and management of the cryptoci asset trading platform, clarifying the status of cryptographic assets, and introducing executable Castrment requirements. Some proposals require new legislation, but also includes suggestions on how to start dealing with US regulators until the necessary legislation is enacted. I am. Part II will clarify the current and future costs of the US market due to the lack of an effective cryptocation regulation framework. In this paper, the percentage of global encryption asset transactions on the US trading platform and the proportion of assets issued in the United States are significantly declining and decreasing compared to traditional financial markets. It presents data indicating, restricts the ability to participate in these markets, and decreases the ability to supervise and regulate cryptographic assets. Is shown. In the United States, the uncertainty of regulations continues, indicating that other economic benefits related to encrypted employment, business, tax revenue, and encryption assets will be lost and will continue to be lost. 。 In addition, domestic encrypted asset trading platforms and other service providers comply with US laws, including fraud, prevention of money laundering, related state law regulations, and voluntarily implement more strict customer protection. Nevertheless, many US investors use the gaps in regulations, rely on services providers that do not comply with similar criteria, and have suffered fraud and failure.

In this first part, we compare the U. S. cryptocurrency regulatory landscape with four other major jurisdictions that have taken significant steps toward establishing cryptocurrency regulatory frameworks: Japan, the European Union, Hong Kong, and the United Kingdom. In each case, we review the regulation of (i) cryptocurrency trading platforms, (ii) broker-dealers executing cryptocurrency transactions, (iii) the issuance of new cryptoassets to investors and users, and (iv) cryptocurrency derivatives. We also briefly review the significant steps that four other jurisdictions have taken toward establishing similar frameworks: Australia, Canada, Singapore, and the United Arab Emirates. In comparison, the U. S. lags far behind in establishing an effective cryptocurrency regulatory framework.

d. Derivatives

Our Phase I report provided a comprehensive description of the cryptocurrency regulatory landscape in the U. S. This section reviews the most significant issues and highlights key developments since the publication of our Phase I report.

6. Singapore, Australia, Canada, and the United Arab Emirates

a. Singapore

The U. S. does not have a viable federal regulatory framework for the registration or operation of cryptocurrency trading platforms, whether for securities, commodities, or payment instruments. The exception is the Commodities Futures Trading Commission's ("CFTC") regulation of cryptocurrency derivatives trading platforms, discussed in subpart (d) below. As a result, trading platforms operate under significant legal uncertainty, exposing cryptoasset users and investors to increased risk of loss and fraud.

As we discussed in the Phase I Report, bitcoin and ether, the most important cryptocrypt asset in market capitalization and transactions, and many other crypto assets are products, not US law securities. The Stock Exchange will take the SEC's comprehensive execution authority and the authority, but the spot product exchanges are not underlying the US Federal Financial Financial Regulation Authority. Also, even if the crypto asset and trading platform tries to register as a stock exchange, it is virtually impossible to meet the registration requirements and continuous compliance requirements. It is only one of the examples of this issue, but the stock exchange only allows registered broker dealers to directly access the platform. However, most cryptographic asset trading platform provides direct access to customers, and registered broker dealers can execute cryptocien transactions due to unprecedented compliance requirements described in the following su b-parts (b). It is virtually prohibited.

US regulatory authorities have worsened this situation. Initially, the SEC chairman Gensler acknowledged that the Crypto Asset Trading Platform was not eligible for the regulatory framework of the Stock Exchange, and there is no regulation framework for the cryptocial trading platform. However, the SEC has not taken measures to establish such a framework. On the contrary, since the publication of the Phase I Report, the SEC has not been able to register the Crypto Asset Trading Platform that way, and it has been unclear which assets can be securities. He is pursuing a compulsory measure, regardless of the fact that some encrypted asset trading platforms have been operated as an unregistered stock exchange. In fact, SEC committee member PEIRCE has recently criticized that SEC has not tried to provide an interpretation guideline for the crypto asset, but has been threatening for compulsory measures. As we discussed in the Phase I Report, Bitcoin and Ether, the most important cryptocrypt assets in market capitalization and transactions, and many other crypto assets are products and securities under US law. isn't it. The Stock Exchange will take the SEC's comprehensive execution authority and the authority, but the spot product exchanges are not underlying the US Federal Financial Financial Regulation Authority. Also, even if the crypto asset and trading platform tries to register as a stock exchange, it is virtually impossible to meet the registration requirements and continuous compliance requirements. It is only one of the examples of this issue, but the stock exchange only allows registered broker dealers to directly access the platform. However, most cryptographic asset trading platform provides direct access to customers, and registered broker dealers can execute cryptocien transactions due to unprecedented compliance requirements described in the following su b-parts (b). It is virtually prohibited.

US regulatory authorities have worsened this situation. Initially, the SEC chairman Gensler acknowledged that the Crypto Asset Trading Platform was not eligible for the regulatory framework of the Stock Exchange, and there is no regulation framework for the cryptocial trading platform. However, the SEC has not taken measures to establish such a framework. On the contrary, since the publication of the Phase I Report, the SEC has not been able to register the Crypto Asset Trading Platform that way, and it has been unclear which assets can be securities. He is pursuing a compulsory measure, regardless of the fact that some encrypted asset trading platforms have been operated as an unregistered stock exchange. In fact, SEC committee member PEIRCE has recently criticized that SEC has not tried to provide an interpretation guideline for the crypto asset, but has been threatening for compulsory measures. As we discussed in the Phase I Report, bitcoin and ether, the most important cryptocrypt asset in market capitalization and transactions, and many other crypto assets are products, not US law securities. The Stock Exchange will take the SEC's comprehensive execution authority and the authority, but the spot product exchanges are not underlying the US Federal Financial Financial Regulation Authority. Also, even if the crypto asset and trading platform tries to register as a stock exchange, it is virtually impossible to meet the registration requirements and continuous compliance requirements. It is only one of the examples of this issue, but the stock exchange only allows registered broker dealers to directly access the platform. However, most cryptographic asset trading platform provides direct access to customers, and registered broker dealers can execute cryptocien transactions with unprecedented compliance requirements described in the following su b-parts (b). It is virtually prohibited.

b. Australia

US regulatory authorities have worsened this situation. Initially, the SEC chairman Gensler acknowledged that the encryption asset trading platform was not eligible for the regulatory framework of the Stock Exchange, and there is no regulation framework for the cryptocial trading platform. However, the SEC has not taken measures to establish such a framework. On the contrary, since the publication of the Phase I Report, the SEC has not been able to register the Crypto Asset Trading Platform that way, and even though it has been unclear which assets can be securities. He is pursuing a compulsory measure, regardless of the fact that some encrypted asset trading platforms have been operated as an unregistered stock exchange. In fact, SEC committee member PEIRCE has recently criticized that SEC has not tried to provide an interpretation guideline for the crypto asset, but has been threatening for compulsory measures.

In addition, the SEC rules and the guidance of the bank regulatory authorities impose a major restriction on providing the custo m-t o-duty service of the crypto asset by a thir d-party Castdian. In particular, SEC staff accounting guidance (STAFF ACCOUNTING BULLETIN 121 ("SAB 121")) is effectively accounting for major banks and broker dealers as a Castian as an asset on their own balance sheet. We are required to process, and as a result, the necessary capital increases. This is very different from the accounting of all other types of custody assets that are not listed in the Casodian balance sheet. As PEIRCE has pointed out in a recent lecture, the disadvantage of the deviation from past practices on practical work is that institutions that have specialized knowledge that safely custodes financial assets, especially banks and registered broker dealers, are encrypted assets. It is limited to providing a larg e-scale Castle Service. In addition, it is more likely that customer encryption assets will be charged by Casodian during bankruptcy. The Currency Supervision Agency (OCC) also states that it will apply "strict monitoring" to provide the Cast Dodi Service by bank under OCC. The major banks have mentioned this attitude as another serious obstacle to providing crypto asset Casty Services, and thus providing all services in the cipher assets. While various encryption asset trading platforms are working on design and implementation voluntarily, the provision of encrypted asset Castodi Services is a major obstacle to the provision of cryptographic asset Castry Service and the provision of all services in the field of encrypted assets. I am. In addition, the guidance of the SEC rules and bank regulation authorities has significantly restricted the provision of the Crypto Asset Cust Disset by a thir d-party Castdian. In particular, SEC staff accounting guidance (STAFF ACCOUNTING BULLETIN 121 ("SAB 121")) is effectively accounting for major banks and broker dealers as a Castian as an asset on their own balance sheet. We are required to process, and as a result, the necessary capital increases. This is very different from the accounting of all other types of custody assets that are not listed in the Casodian balance sheet. As PEIRCE has pointed out in a recent lecture, the disadvantage of the deviation from past practices on practical work is that institutions that have specialized knowledge that safely custodes financial assets, especially banks and registered broker dealers, are encrypted assets. It is limited to providing a larg e-scale Castle Service. In addition, it is more likely that customer encryption assets will be charged by Casodian during bankruptcy. The Currency Supervision Agency (OCC) also states that it will apply "strict monitoring" to provide the Cast Dodi Service by bank under OCC. The major banks have mentioned this attitude as another serious obstacle to providing crypto asset Casty Services, and thus providing all services in the cipher assets. While various encryption asset trading platforms are working on design and implementation voluntarily, the provision of encrypted asset Castodi Services is a major obstacle to the provision of cryptographic asset Castry Service and the provision of all services in the field of encrypted assets. I am. In addition, the SEC rules and the guidance of the bank regulatory authorities impose a major restriction on providing the custo m-t o-duty service of the crypto asset by a thir d-party Castdian. In particular, SEC staff accounting guidance (STAFF ACCOUNTING BULLETIN 121 ("SAB 121")) is effectively accounting for major banks and broker dealers as a Castian as an asset on their own balance sheet. We are required to process, and as a result, the necessary capital increases. This is very different from the accounting of all other types of custody assets that are not listed in the Casodian balance sheet. As PEIRCE has pointed out in a recent lecture, the disadvantage of the deviation from past practices on practical work is that institutions that have specialized knowledge that safely custodes financial assets, especially banks and registered broker dealers, are encrypted assets. It is limited to providing a larg e-scale Castle Service. In addition, it is more likely that customer encryption assets will be charged by Casodian during bankruptcy. The Currency Supervision Agency (OCC) also states that it will apply "strict monitoring" to provide the Cast Dodi Service by bank under OCC. The major banks have mentioned this attitude as another serious obstacle to providing cryptoci asset Casty Services, and in the encryption asset field. While various encryption asset trading platforms are working on design and implementation voluntarily, the provision of encrypted asset Castodi Services is a major obstacle to the provision of cryptographic asset Castry Service and the provision of all services in the field of encrypted assets. I am.

Customer protection standards applied to securities broker dealers are not applied to broker dealers who intervene or execute the most valuable and generally traded crypto asset trading. As a result, these broker dealers are not eligible for the best execution obligation, qualified custodian requirements, or froneling ban applied to the SEC registration broker that routes or executes securities transactions for customers. 。 In addition, the minimum margin regulation applied to the broker that makes customers leverage is not applied. As we discussed in Part III, it may not be necessary to apply the same version as these standards in the encryption asset market, but now customers do not have a comprehensive federal standard. However, some states, such as New York, have enacted custody requirements for brokers and other service providers. Customer protection standards applied to securities broker dealers do not apply to broker dealers that are most valuable and generally traded. As a result, these broker dealers are not eligible for the best execution obligation, qualified custodian requirements, or froneling ban applied to the SEC registration broker that routes or executes securities transactions for customers. 。 In addition, the minimum margin regulation applied to the broker that makes customers leverage is not applied. As we discussed in Part III, it may not be necessary to apply the same version as these standards in the encryption asset market, but now customers do not have a comprehensive federal standard. However, some states, such as New York, have enacted custody requirements for brokers and other service providers. Customer protection standards applied to securities broker dealers are not applied to broker dealers who intervene or execute the most valuable and generally traded crypto asset trading. As a result, these broker dealers are not eligible for the best execution obligation, qualified custodian requirements, or froneling ban applied to the SEC registration broker that routes or executes securities transactions for customers. 。 In addition, the minimum margin regulation applied to the broker that makes customers leverage is not applied. As we discussed in Part III, it may not be necessary to apply the same version as these standards in the encryption asset market, but now customers do not have a comprehensive federal standard. However, some states, such as New York, have enacted custody requirements for brokers and other service providers.

Moreover, SEC rules have effectively prevented registered securities broker-dealers from handling cryptocurrency transactions. In particular, the SEC’s guidance, the Special Purpose Broker-Dealer (SPBD) Guidance, provides that broker-dealers that trade cryptocurrency securities must obtain a license and limit their business activities to cryptocurrency securities only. Thus, registered broker-dealers cannot handle cryptocurrency securities transactions for their clients unless they also engage in other businesses, including trading stocks, bonds, and non-securities crypto assets. Broker-dealers may also be subject to unfeasible capital requirements as a result of the SEC Guidance. The SEC Guidance requires public reporting companies to carry liabilities for custodized crypto assets on their balance sheets. And because very few cryptocurrency securities are currently registered with the SEC, a registered broker-dealer approved to handle cryptocurrency securities would effectively have no assets to trade. In fact, only one broker-dealer has gone through the registration process and is not yet operational. The lack of tradable cryptocurrency securities is due to a non-functioning framework for registration and reporting of cryptocurrency securities. Also, as discussed in (c) below, the SEC has not clarified which crypto assets are securities, so market participants who wish to rely on the SPBD Guidance have no choice but to read the outdated guidance.

c. Canada

General securities are subject to comprehensive information disclosure and act requirements designed to protect investors and securities markets. However, Crypto Asset has its own technical aspects that challenge the classification standards of conventional securities, and both SEC and the lawyers determine which crypto asset is the securities, which is a clear and legal binding standard. Not promulgated. Also, even if the crypto asset can be clearly classified as a securities, the requirements applied to the issuance and transactions of securities cannot be used consistently to the crypto asset securities, which has information that is useful for crypto asset investors. It will be omitted. Furthermore, the provision and use of a specific encryption asset, and the network that operates them tends to evolve as they are decentralized, and when such a transition occurs, when and what are the regulations? There is no clear standard for determining whether to change to to the United States.

Since the announcement of the Phase II Report, the US court has been directly sold in XRP in a conflict between the SEC and the Crystal asset issuer about whether or not the cryptographic asset s-xrp- are regarded as securities. The next sale was a formula that it was not a securities trading. However, the judge in another lawsuit denied this distinction and recognized a specific encryption asset as a securities. These rulings give a certain guideline to the market participants in applying the definition of securities to encrypted assets, but the ruling is complicated, has not reached a consistent conclusion, and may be sued. be. More in general, relying on the court's judgment when applying existing securities to the crypto asset is unlikely to create a comprehensive and eas y-t o-apply standard in the short term. General securities publishers are subject to comprehensive information disclosure and act requirements designed to protect investors and securities markets. However, Crypto Asset has its own technical aspects that challenge the classification standards of conventional securities, and both SEC and the lawyers determine which crypto asset is the securities, which is a clear and legal binding standard. Not promulgated. Also, even if the crypto asset can be clearly classified as a securities, the requirements applied to the issuance and transactions of securities cannot be used consistently to the crypto asset securities, which has information that is useful for crypto asset investors. It will be omitted. Furthermore, the provision and use of a specific encryption asset, and the network that operates them tends to evolve as they are decentralized, and when such a transition occurs, when and what are the regulations? There is no clear standard for determining whether to change to to the United States.

Since the announcement of the Phase II Report, the US court has been directly sold in XRP in a conflict between the SEC and the Crystal asset issuer about whether or not the cryptographic asset s-xrp- are regarded as securities. The next sale was a formula that it was not a securities trading. However, the judge in another lawsuit denied this distinction and recognized a specific encryption asset as a securities. These rulings give a certain guideline to the market participants in applying the definition of securities to encrypted assets, but the ruling is complicated, has not reached a consistent conclusion, and may be sued. be. More in general, relying on the court's judgment when applying existing securities to the crypto asset is unlikely to create a comprehensive and eas y-t o-apply standard in the short term. General securities are subject to comprehensive information disclosure and act requirements designed to protect investors and securities markets. However, Crypto Asset has its own technical aspects that challenge the classification standards of conventional securities, and both SEC and the lawyers determine which crypto asset is the securities, which is a clear and legal binding standard. Not promulgated. Also, even if the crypto asset can be clearly classified as a securities, the requirements applied to the issuance and transactions of securities cannot be used consistently to the crypto asset securities, which has information that is useful for crypto asset investors. It will be omitted. Furthermore, the provision and use of a specific encryption asset, and the network that operates them tends to evolve as they are decentralized, and when such a transition occurs, when and what are the regulations? There is no clear standard for determining whether to change to to the United States.

In contrast to the spot market for encrypted assets, derivative trading of cryptographic assets is generally a product derivative transaction, including the rules that prohibit Castodi protection and abusive trading platforms, the comprehensive execution of CFTC and the authority to enact the rules. It is effectively incorporated into the existing framework of. As a result, when the trading platform FTX broke down in 2022, the US customers in the Derivative Platform did not lose access to funds, in contrast to US customers in the FTX spot platform. Six years and 20 years have passed since the release of cipher asset futures products on the CFTC regulated product futures exchanges, and the cipher asset product futures market is deeper, more fluid, transparent, and wel l-formed. CFTC is actively cracking down on fraud and operation through crackdowns. The relative success of the encryption asset and product market in the United States suggests that the spot market has a similar effective framework.

d. United Arab Emirates

Since 2017, Japan has introduced a comprehensive regulation structure that maintains investor protection and promotes cryptographic assets on intensive trading platforms, issuing new cryptographic assets, and promoting cipher assets. I have done it. Japan's regulatory authorities have revised and complement existing laws and regulations to incorporate regulations specializing in encrypted assets, and have realized this by creating sel f-regulated organizations specializing in crypto assets. Japan's regulatory authorities have been updating and improving regularly since the first adoption of these provisions. The effectiveness of Japan's regulatory structure was exemplified by the protection of Japanese customers of FTX, a global encryption asset trading platform. When the FTX collapsed in 2022, other lawyers, including the United States, suffered significant losses, while the Japanese regulatory system ensured that Japanese customers maintain access to assets. Japan also has a framework that specializes in the issue and transactions of Stable Coin, but the series of PIFS reports does not focus on Stable Cowin, so it is not discussed here.

In 2017, Japan was forced to register for the Japanese Payment Service ("PSA") to the Crystopic Asset Trading Platform, which promotes the transaction of no n-security cryptocien assets containing Bitcoin, Ether, and most other major encryption assets. Introduced a system and regulatory system. In contrast to the

The authorities of the Crypto Asset Trading Platform are the Financial Services Agency ("FSA"), and the agency is also responsible for the directors of stock exchanges, banks and insurers. The Crypto Asset Trading Platform must be registered with the FSA as the "Citamy Asset Exchange Service Provider" ("CAESP") and comply with the PSA rules applied to the CAESP. The Financial Services Agency has issued a business improvement order for a trading platform that does not comply with these requirements, and has the authority to suspend the business on the no n-compliant trading platform. The trading platform will also be supervised by the Financial Services Agency Certified Sel f-Regulatory Organization (Japan Cryptocurrency Exchange Association (JVCEA)). JVCEA has issued additional rules for the operation of the Crypto Asset Trading Platform and the listing of encrypted assets.

Registration requirements are applied not only to domestic providers, but also to foreign companies that offer services in Japan. To get a registered qualification, the Crypto Asset Trading Platform must have an office and representative in Japan. In addition, the Financial Services Agency must obtain prior approval on organizational structure, operation system, and compliance system.

After the registration, the trading platform must provide customers with prescribed information disclosure, including balance sheet, profit and loss statement, information on the characteristics of cryptographic assets that can be traded on the platform, detailed information on risks, and information on transaction fees. The platform must implement and maintain operation measures in operation, comply with the rules for money laundering, and comply with advertising regulations.

II. THE COSTS OF THE INEFFECTIVE US CRYPTOASSET REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

Japan allows direct retractor access to trade on the Crypto Asset Trading Platform without broker broker, which contrasts it with traditional financial assets trading that requires broker brokerage. It is. The authorities of the Cryptence Asset Trading Platform are the Financial Services Agency ("FSA"), and the agency is also responsible for security exchanges, banks and insurers. The Crypto Asset Trading Platform must be registered with the FSA as the "Citamy Asset Exchange Service Provider" ("CAESP") and comply with the PSA rules applied to the CAESP. The Financial Services Agency has issued a business improvement order for a trading platform that does not comply with these requirements, and has the authority to suspend the business on the no n-compliant trading platform. The trading platform will also be supervised by the Financial Services Agency Certified Sel f-Regulatory Organization (Japan Cryptocurrency Exchange Association (JVCEA)). JVCEA has issued additional rules for the operation of the Crypto Asset Trading Platform and the listing of encrypted assets.

1. Cryptoasset investors and users are avoiding US markets.

Registration requirements are applied not only to domestic providers, but also to foreign companies that offer services in Japan. To get a registered qualification, the Crypto Asset Trading Platform must have an office and representative in Japan whether it is a domestic company in Japan. In addition, the Financial Services Agency must obtain prior approval on organizational structure, operation system, and compliance system.

Japan allows direct retractor access to trade on the Crypto Asset Trading Platform without broker broker, which contrasts it with traditional financial assets trading that requires broker brokerage. It is. The authorities of the Crypto Asset Trading Platform are the Financial Services Agency ("FSA"), and the agency is also responsible for the directors of stock exchanges, banks and insurers. The Crypto Asset Trading Platform must be registered with the FSA as the "Citamy Asset Exchange Service Provider" ("CAESP") and comply with the PSA rules applied to the CAESP. The Financial Services Agency has issued a business improvement order for a trading platform that does not comply with these requirements, and has the authority to suspend the business on the transaction platform that does not comply. The trading platform will also be supervised by the Financial Services Agency Certified Sel f-Regulatory Organization (Japan Cryptocurrency Exchange Association (JVCEA)). JVCEA has issued additional rules for the operation of the Crypto Asset Trading Platform and the listing of encrypted assets.

a. The share of global cryptoasset transaction volume on US trading platforms lags behind other markets.

Registration requirements are applied not only to domestic providers, but also to foreign companies that offer services in Japan. To get a registered qualification, the Crypto Asset Trading Platform must have an office and representative in Japan whether it is a domestic company in Japan. In addition, the Financial Services Agency must obtain prior approval on organizational structure, operation system, and compliance system.

Registered cryptocurrency trading platforms are permitted to custody customers' crypto assets in accordance with cryptocurrency-specific custody requirements. Specifically, the platform must (1) separate customer crypto assets from the operator's assets by storing them in separate wallets, (2) store at least 95% of the custodized customer crypto assets in cold wallets (i. e., wallets not connected to the Internet), (3) hold sufficient platform operator crypto assets in cold wallets to cover customer crypto assets held in hot wallets (i. e., wallets connected to the Internet) and provide customers with the right to reimbursement from these operator's assets in the event of loss, theft, or insolvency. Trading platforms must also hire a certified public accountant for an annual audit of their custody operations. However, cryptocurrency trading platforms may not in any case store customer fiat currency, which must instead be stored in a third-party qualified custodian. Before a trading platform accepts a crypto asset for trading, the platform must conduct an evaluation of the crypto asset showing that the crypto asset can be traded safely on the platform and submit the evaluation to the JVCEA for approval. Each trading platform that wants to accept trading of a particular crypto asset must conduct its own new evaluation until the crypto asset is accepted for trading on at least three registered platforms, at which point the evaluation requirement for all other trading platforms is lifted. The exact criteria for this evaluation are unclear, and the approval process may be lengthy. This has reportedly significantly backed up the JVCEA's approval process, resulting in delays in crypto assets being able to be traded on multiple platforms. The FSA and the JVCEA are therefore considering new rules that would lift the examination requirement once a crypto asset has been examined and approved by a single trading platform.

b. The share of cryptoasset transaction volume denominated in US-issued assets lags behind other markets and is declining.

If a trading platform facilitates trading of crypto asset securities (crypto assets that provide the holder with a share of an ownership interest or profit in a business or investment enterprise), it must obtain a registration status similar to that of a traditional stock exchange or securities broker.

Japan has not enacted a regulatory framework for decentralized trading platforms.

Broker-dealers who execute crypto asset transactions on behalf of their clients must register with the FSA as a CAESP. Crypto asset broker-dealers must therefore meet the same registration standards as trading platforms and comply with the continuous disclosure, operational security, anti-money laundering, and custody requirements that apply to crypto asset trading platforms, as described above. Crypto asset broker-dealers are also subject to the same best execution obligations that apply to traditional securities market broker-dealers.

Japan's crypto asset-specific self-regulatory organizations have created a framework specific to the issuance of new crypto assets to investors and users. These rules require (1) the JVCEA's approval of the issuer's business structure, (2) disclosure of certain information to underwriters, including information about the offered crypto assets, the issuer's business, and the issuer's proposed use of the offering proceeds, (3) segregation of the offering proceeds from the issuer's other assets, (4) compliance with general accounting standards, and (5) the JVCEA's approval of the issuer's valuation of the offered crypto assets. Issuers must also demonstrate that they can ensure the secure operation of the underlying blockchain and wallet tools used to hold the crypto assets. These requirements only apply when an issuer receives money in exchange for issuing crypto assets; that is, they do not apply to free issuances (often called "airdrops").

The issued crypto assets can only be sold by or through registered trading platforms or broker-dealers.

c. Cryptoasset market activity can quickly flow into the US when regulatory issues are resolved.

Japan incorporates a framework specific to the issuance of crypto-asset securities into the broad framework that applies to the issuance of traditional securities. In general, if the terms of a crypto-asset security require the issuer to approve the transfer of crypto-assets and limit ownership to institutional investors, the crypto-asset security is subject to the less stringent disclosure requirements that apply to private placements of traditional securities to institutional investors. If the crypto-asset security is not subject to these transfer restrictions or ownership restrictions, it is subject to the more comprehensive disclosure requirements that apply to public securities issuances, including the filing of a registration statement with the Financial Services Agency and the publication of a prospectus to potential investors.

Japanese regulators have also issued clear and comprehensive criteria for distinguishing crypto-asset securities from non-securities. The criteria are mainly based on whether crypto-asset tokens give holders ownership or the right to share in the profits of a business or investment enterprise.

2. The US has lost cryptoasset-related jobs and businesses, tax revenue, and other cryptoasset-related economic benefits.

Japan has amended its Financial Regulation Act to incorporate crypto-asset derivatives trading into the framework of derivatives trading for traditional financial assets. Therefore, trading platforms and broker-dealers that facilitate crypto-asset derivatives trading must register with the Financial Services Agency, and information on over-the-counter trading of crypto-asset derivatives must be reported to the Financial Services Agency.

a. Loss of cryptoasset-related jobs and businesses

In June 2023, the European Union (EU) established a specialized regulatory framework for crypto-asset trading platforms, broker-dealers, and issuers in the form of the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA). MiCA will come into effect on December 30, 2024. The requirements of MiCA apply to anyone providing crypto-asset services to EU residents, regardless of whether the service provider is located inside or outside the EU.

Similar to the EU approach to regulating traditional financial products, the administration and enforcement of MiCA is the primary responsibility of EU member state national authorities. However, the EU financial market regulator and supervisor (the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA)) is empowered to issue guidelines for member states’ application of MiCA.

MiCA applies to non-security crypto assets, such as Bitcoin and Ether, and stablecoins. It does not apply to crypto-asset securities or crypto-related financial products, such as crypto-asset investment funds and crypto-asset derivatives. Instead, the EU clarified that these crypto-assets and related products are subject to the EU’s existing financial regulation, in particular the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive (MiFID II). MiCA includes provisions that harmonize the application of MiFID II to crypto-securities and other crypto-related financial products with the new framework for crypto-assets, as further explained below. MiCA’s stablecoin provisions are not discussed here.

MiCA also excludes NFTs and decentralized trading platforms. However, the EU is expected to publish initial legislative proposals for regulating decentralized trading platforms and NFTs by the end of 2024.

Cryptocurrency trading platforms must obtain a license from the national regulator of the EU jurisdiction in which the platform is based. To obtain a license, the platform must demonstrate to the regulator that it has in place basic operating policies, governance arrangements, asset segregation and custody practices, and complaints handling procedures. Once licensed in an EU member state, the platform may then operate across the EU by notifying the licensing authority.

Licensed trading platforms are permitted to custody customers' crypto assets in accordance with crypto-asset-specific custody rules. In particular, (i) customer crypto assets must be operationally and legally separated from the platform's assets, including in the event of insolvency, (ii) the platform must not use customer crypto assets for its own account, and (iii) the platform must have documented policies designed to minimize the risk of theft or loss of custodized crypto assets, including through fraud or cyber attacks.

b. Loss of investment

Before allowing crypto-assets to be traded, a trading platform must (i) ensure that a compliant disclosure document (known as a "white paper") containing information about the characteristics of the crypto-asset has been published, either by the crypto-asset's issuer or by the trading platform itself, and (ii) conduct its own assessment of the crypto-asset's technical design, the issuer and its development team, and any potential associations with wrongdoing or fraudulent activities.

Trading platforms must comply with ongoing customer protection rules, including a prohibition on operators trading on their own platforms, and pre- and post-trade transparency requirements that require the publication of bid-ask spreads, trading profit depth, and the price, volume, and time of each transaction made on the platform.

c. Loss of innovation

Among these requirements, trading platforms have considerable flexibility to facilitate trading in various crypto-assets and offer multiple services to their customers. The framework also facilitates the provision of crypto-asset-related services by providers registered under existing financial regulatory regimes without going through a separate licensing process, although they must adhere to the same ongoing compliance rules as newly licensed providers. Furthermore, if the same trading platform is licensed under both MiCA and MiFID II, it is permitted to facilitate trading in both non-secured and secured crypto-assets.

The Crypto Asset Trading Platform is also allowed to access no n-securities encryption assets directly without broker. This is in contrast to traditional financial assets transactions that individual investors prohibit trading without broker mediation. Currently, the platform cannot allow individual customers to allow securities trading of cryptographic assets without broker mediation. However, the EU has implemented a trial system for specific trading platforms so that individual investors can directly trade limited number of encrypted securities.

MICA streamlines the conventional stock exchange operator's license acquisition process, and has imposed the same continuous compliance requirements as a newly licensed platform, but informs regulatory authorities in its own country. , Automatically obtain a license to acquire a cryptocien asset trading platform.

d. Loss of tax revenue

Crypto asset broker dealers, like trading platforms, need to obtain the license from the domestic regulation authorities of Broker dealers in the domestic regulations. Acquisition of license is allowed to hold the customer's encrypted asset in accordance with the same crypto asse t-specific Custody rules that are applied to the licensed trading platform. Crypto asset broker dealers are also eligible for the best execution obligation as the securities broker dealer. As in the case of a trading platform, registered securities broker dealers can automatically obtain licensing to handle the transaction of no n-securities encryption assets.

3. US customers and investors are at greater risk of fraud and loss.

Before the cryptographic assets are issued to the general public or transactions on the trading platform, the publisher is "White Paper", which includes the issuer, cryptographic assets, basic blockchain technology, and investment risks. Must be issued and submitted to related domestic regulations. The publisher also must comply with the content and timing of marketing and communication. Crypto Asset Trading Platform is also allowed to access the transaction of no n-securities encryption assets without brokerment of a broker. This is in contrast to traditional financial assets transactions that individual investors prohibit trading without broker mediation. Currently, the platform cannot allow individual customers to allow securities trading of cryptographic assets without broker mediation. However, the EU has implemented a trial system for specific trading platforms so that individual investors can directly trade limited number of encrypted securities.

MICA streamlines the conventional licensed license acquisition process, and has imposed the same continuous compliance requirements as a newly licensed platform, but notifies regulatory authorities in its own country. , Automatically obtain a license to acquire a cryptocien asset trading platform.

Before the cryptographic assets are issued to the general public or transactions on the trading platform, the publisher is "White Paper", which includes the issuer, cryptographic assets, basic blockchain technology, and investment risks. Must be issued and submitted to related domestic regulations. The publisher also must comply with the content and timing of marketing and communication. The Crypto Asset Trading Platform is also allowed to access no n-securities encryption assets directly without broker. This is in contrast to traditional financial assets trading that individual investors prohibit trading without broker intermediary. Currently, the platform cannot allow individual customers to allow securities trading of cryptographic assets without broker mediation. However, the EU has implemented a trial system for specific trading platforms so that individual investors can directly trade limited number of encrypted securities.

FTX (2022): $166 million+ in potential US customer losses from abusive trading practices and improper custody practices.

Crypto asset broker dealers, like trading platforms, need to obtain the license from the domestic regulation authorities of Broker dealers in the domestic regulations. When the license is obtained, the broker dealer is allowed to hold the customer's crypto assets in accordance with the same crypto asse t-specific Custody rules that are applied to the licensed trading platform. Crypto asset broker dealers are also eligible for the best execution obligation as the securities broker dealer. As in the case of a trading platform, registered securities broker dealers can automatically obtain licensing to handle the transaction of no n-securities encryption assets.

Celsius (2022): Trading platform customers lose access to $4 billion in deposits.

Bitfinex (2018): $850 billion in trading platform customer deposits placed at risk.

These issuance requirements include (1) offering (1) offering (such as "air drop"), (2) a cryptoa set that is automatically created as a reward token for maintaining and transaction verification. 3) Utility token that provides access to existing products and services, or utility tokens that can be exchanged for products and services only with limited merchant networks, (4) "Completely distributed" offering (that is, publisher and or Instead of being managed by other small groups, it is rather managed by issuer, provider, or small groups, which are not applied to the offering managed by decentralized user community. Rather, an offering managed by the dispensed user community.

Public recruitment of securitie s-type encrypted assets and participation in transactions are subject to the same regulations that are applied to traditional securities. These rules are required to publish prospects before the securitie s-type encrypted assets are generally provided or traded on the trading platform. However, unlike the case of a no n-securities encryption asset, the approval of the regulatory authorities is required before recruiting or listing encryption asset securities.

III. IMPLEMENTING AN EFFECTIVE CRYPTOASSET REGULATORY FRAMEWORK IN THE US

ESMA has announced a detailed guidance that clarifies the criteria of whether the cryptographic assets are classified as securities (or "financial products") or no n-securities. These criteria are examined whether the encryption asset will give the holder a securitie s-like right, such as a voting rights for dividends and issuer decisio n-making.

1. Establish a workable registration framework for cryptoasset trading platforms, broker-dealers, and custody providers.

ESMA has announced guidance that clarifies that encrypted asset derivatives are subject to existing MIFID II securities systems, regardless of whether the original assets are securities. Therefore, in most cases, cryptographic asset derivatives are treated in the same way as securities under the existing system, similar to no n-cryptocated asset derivatives, which can be traded by both institutional investors and individual investors.

From 2022 to 2023, Hong Kong has revised the Financial Regulation Law ("Securities Futures Ordinance (" SFO ")), incorporates the specifications unique to encryption assets, and issuing a cryptographic asse t-specific guidance to publish a cryptographic asset. A trading platform, broker dealer, publisher, and dedicated regulatory framework has been established. This framework is managed by Hong Kong's Securities Regulatory Office (Securities Futures Committee (SFC)).

The VATP license allows platforms to facilitate trading of non-security crypto assets such as bitcoin and ether, but does not apply to crypto securities.

After registration, VATP must comply with comprehensive customer protection and other compliance requirements covering governance, information disclosure, due diligence of listed crypto assets, and anti-money laundering. Trading platforms may allow retail investors to trade directly on the platform without the intermediation of a broker.

Trading platforms must provide customers with certain information about crypto assets traded on the platform, including information about the management and development team that designed the crypto asset, and the crypto asset's terms, characteristics, and risks.

Trading platforms are permitted to custody customers' crypto assets, provided that the custodized assets are held in a wholly owned subsidiary that limits its activities to custody and adheres to specified custody rules. Specifically, custodians must hold at least 98% of customers' crypto assets in cold wallets. There must also be an arrangement approved by the SFC to indemnify customers against losses of up to 50% of crypto assets held by the custodian in cold wallets and up to 100% of crypto assets held by the custodian in hot wallets. Customer fiat currency must be held in segregated accounts managed by a bank and not pledged or otherwise secured. The bank must be located in Hong Kong, unless customer funds are received outside Hong Kong and the SFC approves a different arrangement.

To facilitate trading in crypto-asset securities, an operator must obtain a stock exchange operating license under Hong Kong's existing regulatory framework for stock exchanges. However, Hong Kong is harmonizing its new VATP framework with this existing framework by allowing trading platforms with both a VATP license and a stock exchange operating license to combine trading of both categories of assets on the same platform. Also, while the application processes for these licenses are currently separate, Hong Kong plans to introduce a single application process to streamline the framework.

Hong Kong's framework does not cover decentralized trading platforms.

2. Create rigorous and flexible cryptoasset-specific custody requirements.

Broker dealers, who execute encrypted assets for customers in Hong Kong, need to register as a "virtual asset service provider" ("Vasp") and get a license. Vasp follows the same Cast Dody requirements and disclosure requirements as VATP. In addition, those who work as a fund manager are the best execution obligations. Broker dealers, who execute crypto asset transactions, are subject to registration requirements and customer protection standards similar to traditional securities broker dealers.

Hong Kong has established a framework for general issuance of new cryptographic assets based on the existing framework of traditional securities. In the case of not a securities, the issuer is not directly subject to direct disclosure requirements. Instead, in Hong Kong, to the transaction platform, broker dealer, and Custody provider to guarantee that the produc t-specific information to be disclosed is not false, prejudiced, or deceptive. We are looking for "taking measures".

На эов кых цых басасасан е е еован, чо на эов тадцоны цы кая вып поса э па м оодоб оагагачачазазазазазазазазазазазазазаза э э э. бован к юом уом уом пом поакых цаг гаг гаг гаг гаг гаг гаг иорам того, баз л э в гонон в вор. о тоакая уагая оычобак как пдосаваяаяая ваде вас вом пдп ионом поду эа.
Гонон разае торатам на какы нозы, и ионалы морам. рае возожожож поратых аов, которые разат тогов коаам иакам ионалым иорам.
Currently, the United Kingdom is restricted only by encryption asset securities, defining it as a cryptographic asset that provides "rights and obligations" similar to "stocks and debt certificates." However, in 2023, the UK enacted a bill to build a comprehensive encryption regulation framework, including encrypted assets other than securities. For details of this framework, the additional "Second" laws proposed by the British Finance ("HM Treasury") and the major financial market regulations in the UK ("Financial Conduct Authority"). Is required. HM Treasure and FCA have set a goal of proposing secondary law by the end of 2024.
The Ministry of Finance explained the framework of regulating the crypto asset trading platform. Generally, the crypto asset trading platform is eligible for the existing rules of the UK ("regulatory target activity" system) on traditional financial services, such as banking and investment advice services. In addition, it is necessary to acquire an FCA license. In this framework, the Crypto Asset Trading Platform is allowed to promote exchanges with other assets such as encryption assets, Fiat currency, other cipher assets, and commodities. The FCA is given the authority to formulate more detailed regulations, specially applied to the Crypto Asset Trading Platform.

3. Permit combined services for cryptoasset securities and non-securities.

The UK also expressed the intention to regulate "loan, borrowing, leverage activities" such as "protection and / or managed (custody) activities" by encryption asset trading platforms and "lending, borrowing, leverage activities", such as "operating a cryptocial asset lending platform". I am. Britain currently has direct access to individual investors on the Crypto Asset Transactions Platform, and has not shown the intention to prohibit such direct access in the future.

The UK has already fully constructed encrypted asse t-related services, including encrypted asset trading platforms, to existing financial services and marketing systems ("financial promotion" system) to complete the law to restrict marketing of encrypted services for British customers. Is being implemented. For example, marketing and financial promotions on the trading platform prohibits customers with incentives trading on the platform (such as "friend introduction" or "new subscription" bonuses) to customers. Currently, the United Kingdom is restricted only by encryption asset securities, defining it as a cryptographic asset that provides "rights and obligations" similar to "stocks and debt certificates." However, in 2023, the UK enacted a bill to build a comprehensive encryption regulation framework, including encrypted assets other than securities. For details of this framework, the additional "Second" laws proposed by the British Finance ("HM Treasury") and the major financial market regulations in the UK ("Financial Conduct Authority"). Is required. HM Treasure and FCA have set a goal of proposing secondary law by the end of 2024.

The Ministry of Finance explained the framework of regulating the crypto asset trading platform. Generally, the crypto asset trading platform is eligible for the existing rules of the UK ("regulatory target activity" system) on traditional financial services, such as banking and investment advice services. In addition, it is necessary to acquire an FCA license. In this framework, the Crypto Asset Trading Platform is allowed to promote exchanges with other assets such as encryption assets, Fiat currency, other cipher assets, and commodities. The FCA is given the authority to formulate more detailed regulations, specially applied to the Crypto Asset Trading Platform.

4. Allow for un-intermediated trading with safeguards.

5. Clearly define which cryptoassets require regulation, which set of regulations apply, and the parameters for determining if regulatory treatment may change over time.

The UK has already fully constructed encrypted asse t-related services, including encrypted asset trading platforms, to existing financial services and marketing systems ("financial promotion" system) to complete the law to restrict marketing of encrypted services for British customers. Is being implemented. For example, marketing and financial promotions on the trading platform prohibits customers with incentives trading on the platform (such as "friend introduction" or "new subscription" bonuses) to customers. Currently, the United Kingdom is restricted only by encryption asset securities, defining it as a cryptographic asset that provides "rights and obligations" similar to "stocks and debt certificates." However, in 2023, the UK enacted a bill to build a comprehensive encryption regulation framework, including encrypted assets other than securities. For details of this framework, the additional "Second" laws proposed by the British Finance ("HM Treasury") and the major financial market regulations in the UK ("Financial Conduct Authority"). Is required. HM Treasure and FCA have set a goal of proposing secondary law by the end of 2024.

6. Create cryptoasset-specific disclosure rules.

Similar to the trading platform, it is expected that the encryption broker dealer is expected to be an FCA license because it falls under the regulatory activity system. In addition, cryptocurrent broker dealers are already subject to marketing regulations based on the financial promotion rules that are applied to the abov e-mentioned cryptographic asset trading platform.

The UK has a regulatory activity system or FCA or HM Treasury regulation, but the FCA license is unnecessary new system ("designated activity system system), and the entry of encryption assets and entry of encrypted assets on exchanges. It is a policy to regulate. Details of the framework are determined by future rules.

7. Avoid stifling non-financial uses of cryptoassets.

The publisher who sells the Crypto Asset to British investors and users needs to comply with the same sales regulations as the abov e-mentioned trading platform. It is noteworthy that the publisher of encrypted assets will not be able to rely on exemptions for wealthy and sophisticated investors that can be used in traditional securities offering. The new framework will also adjust the financial promotion system by adding "qualified encryption assets" to the regulated parameters. These rules apply to all that can be redeemed and transferred, such as bitcoin and ether, but exclude CBDCs and utility tokens with limited functions.

8. Place legislative guardrails around regulatory discretion.

The law also gives the British and British Finance with the authority to specify the encryption assets that are widely used in the UK as "systemic". When the Ministry of Finance has designated it, the encryption asset is subject to the UK central bank, England Bank, and the payment system regulation authorities.

The UK has granted the derivative transaction of cryptographic assets only if the cipher assets, which are the original assets, are subject to existing UK financial regulations. The UK is banning derivative retail transactions of encrypted assets that are not securities. As with the Transaction platform, the cryptocurrent broker dealer is expected to be subject to FCA license because it is a regulated activity system, but the accurate contours of the framework are determined by future rules. 。 In addition, cryptocurrent broker dealers are already subject to marketing regulations based on the financial promotion rules that are applied to the abov e-mentioned cryptographic asset trading platform.

9. A comparison of existing US legislative proposals.

The UK has granted the derivative transaction of cryptographic assets only if the cipher assets, which are the original assets, are subject to existing UK financial regulations. The UK is banning derivative retail transactions of encrypted assets that are not securities. Similar to the trading platform, it is expected that the encryption broker dealer is expected to be an FCA license because it falls under the regulatory activity system. In addition, cryptocurrent broker dealers are already subject to marketing regulations based on the financial promotion rules that are applied to the abov e-mentioned cryptographic asset trading platform.

IV. CONCLUSION

The law also gives the British and British Finance with the authority to specify the encryption assets that are widely used in the UK as "systemic". According to the Ministry of Finance, the encryption asset will be supervised by the British central bank, England Bank and the payment system regulation authorities.

Singapore's General Finance Service Regulatory Authority (Singapore Financial Management Bureau, hereafter "MAS") is based on the Payment Service Law (hereinafter "PSA"), which promotes transactions of cryptographic assets that are not considered to be securities. We announced a regulation framework for encrypted asset brokers. In this proposal, which will come into effect in the middle of 2024, the Crypto Asset Trading Platform must acquire a license to provide services in Singapore. Platforms are forbidden to provide individual customers with margin trading and transactions. As a listing conditions for cryptocounter assets, the platform must disclose potential conflicts, publish the standards to manage listing, and establish conflict procedures with customers.

MAS has also announced rules for issuing, storage, and transactions for cryptographic assets. Singapore has revised the Bank and Payment Law to support Stable Coin.

Exclusive: Interview With Congressman Tom Emmer On Regulatory Clarity For Crypto Industry

Specifically, the MAS has announced a rule that the MAS indicates that encryption asset securities are generally subject to the existing financial market regulations on Singapore securities and derivatives (the 2021 Securities Futures Law (hereinafter "SFA")). 。

In the MAS guidance, (1) trading platforms and broker dealers that promote or execute cryptographic securities need to be registered as "approved exchanges" or "approved market operators" respectively. (2) Crystatic Securities Cast Dodiic Services providers need to obtain a capital market service license, and in accordance with the requirements for storing customer assets, (3) publishers of cryptocien securities are traditional. Like the issuer of the securities, it is necessary to submit a prospectus to the MAS.

Although Australia has not yet introduced a comprehensive regulation framework for cryptocien assets, the regulatory authorities have announced proposals to show such a framework and are looking for public comments on these proposals. It is the stage.

Specifically, in October 2023, the Australian Finance announced a draft of the license system for cryptographic asset trading platforms and other cryptocien asset services. The proposal imposes compliance requirements such as customer protection and custody requirements for these services. Singapore's General Finance Service Regulation Authority (Singapore Finance Bureau, hereafter "MAS") is based on the payment service law (hereinafter "PSA"), promoting cryptographic trade trading that is not considered to be securities. Announced a regulatory framework for platforms and other encryption asset brokers. In this proposal, which will come into effect in the middle of 2024, the Crypto Asset Trading Platform must acquire a license to provide services in Singapore. Platforms are forbidden to provide individual customers with margin trading and transactions. As a listing conditions for cryptocounter assets, the platform must disclose potential conflicts, publish the standards to manage listing, and establish conflict procedures with customers.

MAS has also announced rules for issuing, storage, and transactions for cryptographic assets. Singapore has revised the Bank and Payment Law to support Stable Coin.

Google Chrome Deadline—You Have 72 Hours To Update Your Browser

Today’s NYT Mini Crossword Clues And Answers For Monday, September 16th

‘Shogun’ Sweeps All Top Emmy Categories, Crushes ‘Game Of Thrones’ Record

Specifically, in October 2023, the Australian Finance announced a draft of the license system for cryptographic asset trading platforms and other cryptocien asset services. The proposal imposes compliance requirements such as customer protection and custody requirements for these services. Singapore's General Finance Service Regulatory Authority (Singapore Financial Management Bureau, hereafter "MAS") is based on the Payment Service Law (hereinafter "PSA"), which promotes transactions of cryptographic assets that are not considered to be securities. We announced a regulation framework for encrypted asset brokers. In this proposal, which will come into effect in the middle of 2024, the Crypto Asset Trading Platform must acquire a license to provide services in Singapore. Platforms are forbidden to provide individual customers with margin trading and transactions. As a listing conditions for cryptocounter assets, the platform must disclose potential conflicts, publish the standards to manage listing, and establish conflict procedures with customers.

MAS has also announced rules for issuing, storage, and transactions for cryptographic assets. Singapore has revised the Bank and Payment Law to support Stable Coin.

With regard to custody, many of these standards are in line with the custody requirements for traditional financial products and services. However, cryptocurrency custody providers are subject to additional protection requirements to avoid commingling of customer and corporate funds. In addition, platform operators that offer additional features, such as staking of digital assets that are not financial products, are subject to separate requirements.

Draft legislation implementing this proposal is expected to be released in 2024.

Canadian financial regulators are seeking to integrate cryptoassets into Canada's existing financial regulatory statutes by broadly interpreting the existing statutory definition in Canadian securities laws to cover many cryptoassets that are not governed by the securities laws of the United States and other jurisdictions, such as cryptoassets like bitcoin and ether.

Specifically, Canada's domestic securities regulators (the Canadian Securities Agency (CSA), which acts as the umbrella organization for Canada's securities regulators, and the Canadian Investment Regulatory Organization (CIRO), which acts as the self-regulatory organization for the investment industry) have issued guidance stating that while such cryptoassets themselves may not be securities, the contractual relationship between customers trading such cryptoassets and trading platforms is a security and therefore the securities regulatory framework applies.

Canadian regulators have issued joint guidance interpreting and applying Canadian securities law requirements for cryptocurrency trading platforms. The guidance distinguishes between platforms that allow customers direct access to their trading books ("marketplace platforms") and platforms that restrict direct participation to registered broker-dealers ("dealer platforms").

The guidance allows direct retail investor access to cryptocurrency platforms as long as the platform does not provide recommendations or advice to participants. In addition, recognizing that flexibility may be required to evaluate as-yet-undeveloped custody models, it specifies some principles for managing risk, such as separating customer assets and keys from trading platform assets and keys. However, cryptocurrency trading platforms cannot combine trading of cryptoassets, such as bitcoin and ether, that are not securities themselves, with cryptocurrency securities (such as tokenized stocks and bonds) on the same platform.

The Guidance contemplates the provision of custody services by platforms, provided that the platforms comply with certain customer protection requirements. These requirements include the segregation of customer assets, prohibitions on pledges, re-pledging or other use of customer assets, and requirements to hold crypto assets in a "designated trust account" or a designated account with an acceptable third-party custodian.

Elim Poon - Journalist, Creative Writer

Last modified: 27.08.2024

Despite FTX collapse, Emmer continues to be a crypto booster · Kulay at MinnPost - Mon, 03 Aug Will sheriffs in Minnesota enforce a new 'red. Despite FTX collapse, Emmer continues to be a crypto booster - MinnPost (glfe.info). Exclusive | Knives out in House GOP whip race over Electoral. Despite FTX collapse, Emmer continues to be a crypto booster. by Ana Radelat 12/13/ 02/06/ The incoming House Republican majority whip who represents.

Play

accepted

Despite FTX collapse Emmer continues to be a crypto booster MinnPost

Despite FTX collapse, Emmer continues to be a crypto booster

‘Old fashioned embezzlement’

MinnPost articles like this one are available paywall-free 365 days a year.

Related

Join the Conversation

Implementing an Effective Cryptoasset Regulatory Framework in the Unites States

Part III: Implementing an Effective Cryptoasset Regulatory Framework in the US”

Part IV: Conclusion

INTRODUCTION

I. A CROSS-JURISDICTIONAL COMPARISON OF CRYPTOASSET REGULATORY FRAME

1. The United States

a. Trading platforms

b. Broker-dealers

c. Issuances

d. Derivatives

2. Japan

a. Trading platforms

b. Broker-dealers

c. Issuance

d. Derivatives

3. The European Union

a. Trading platforms

b. Broker-dealers

c. Issuance

d. Derivatives

4. Hong Kong

a. Trading platforms

b. Broker-dealers

c. Issuance

d. Derivatives

5. The United Kingdom

a. Trading platforms

b. Broker-dealers

c. Issuance

d. Derivatives

6. Singapore, Australia, Canada, and the United Arab Emirates

a. Singapore

b. Australia

c. Canada

d. United Arab Emirates

II. THE COSTS OF THE INEFFECTIVE US CRYPTOASSET REGULATORY FRAMEWORK

1. Cryptoasset investors and users are avoiding US markets.

a. The share of global cryptoasset transaction volume on US trading platforms lags behind other markets.

b. The share of cryptoasset transaction volume denominated in US-issued assets lags behind other markets and is declining.

c. Cryptoasset market activity can quickly flow into the US when regulatory issues are resolved.

2. The US has lost cryptoasset-related jobs and businesses, tax revenue, and other cryptoasset-related economic benefits.

a. Loss of cryptoasset-related jobs and businesses

b. Loss of investment

c. Loss of innovation

d. Loss of tax revenue

3. US customers and investors are at greater risk of fraud and loss.

FTX (2022): $166 million+ in potential US customer losses from abusive trading practices and improper custody practices.

Celsius (2022): Trading platform customers lose access to $4 billion in deposits.

Bitfinex (2018): $850 billion in trading platform customer deposits placed at risk.

III. IMPLEMENTING AN EFFECTIVE CRYPTOASSET REGULATORY FRAMEWORK IN THE US

1. Establish a workable registration framework for cryptoasset trading platforms, broker-dealers, and custody providers.

2. Create rigorous and flexible cryptoasset-specific custody requirements.

3. Permit combined services for cryptoasset securities and non-securities.

4. Allow for un-intermediated trading with safeguards.

5. Clearly define which cryptoassets require regulation, which set of regulations apply, and the parameters for determining if regulatory treatment may change over time.

6. Create cryptoasset-specific disclosure rules.

7. Avoid stifling non-financial uses of cryptoassets.

8. Place legislative guardrails around regulatory discretion.

9. A comparison of existing US legislative proposals.

IV. CONCLUSION

Exclusive: Interview With Congressman Tom Emmer On Regulatory Clarity For Crypto Industry

Google Chrome Deadline—You Have 72 Hours To Update Your Browser

Today’s NYT Mini Crossword Clues And Answers For Monday, September 16th

‘Shogun’ Sweeps All Top Emmy Categories, Crushes ‘Game Of Thrones’ Record