crypto – Fintechnically Speaking

December 6, 2024December 6, 2024 by Terry R. Weiss

Paul Atkins’ Nomination as SEC Chair Helps to Push Bitcoin Above $100k (for now), But Why…?

Almost immediately after President-Elect Trump posted his announcement of Paul Atkins to replace Gary Gensler as the SEC Chair, the crypto sector, including Bitcoin, rallied, alongside the equity market rally led by the tech sector. Cheers from crypto sector leadership followed. Sure, Chairman Gensler has been no friend of Crypto, begrudgingly approving the trading of Bitcoin-based ETFs and more significantly engaging in rule-making through enforcement. It makes sense then that the expected exit of Chairman Gensler would be applauded, but why Paul Atkins?

SEC Chair nominee Atkins served as an SEC Commissioner with Chairmen Harvey Pitt, Bill Donaldson and Chris Cox, from 2002-2008 and since, has served as the founder and CEO of Patomak Global Partners, consulting for the securities and crypto industries on all manner of topics.

Last February, while in the private sector, SEC Chair nominee Atkins agreed to be interviewed on an outwardly Libertarian podcast. He broadly declared that while the SEC should prosecute illegal activity, like FTX, the agency should also otherwise accommodate innovation to encourage the flow of capital. He stressed that regulators should be “attuned” to opportunities for innovation and “accommodate…reasonably…things that are out there to advance cost savings and innovation.” Specifically, “[t]he SEC should be there with its ear to the ground to figure out which way things are moving and should accommodate activity that’s not criminal and enable markets to flourish because…if it challenges incumbents…and it helps to bring down costs for investors and for people who are trying to raise capital…that’s the reason why we have financial markets and to have capital find its way…to businesses.”[1] This was hardly the regulation through prosecution which was a hallmark of the administration under Chairman Gensler.

While stressing innovation, SEC Chair nominee Atkins was certainly no fan of FTX, SBF or their fraud. But at its core, it was not a problem with crypto: “It happened to happen in the crypto space, but when you peel back the layers it’s the same thing that happened elsewhere, someone without proper controls without proper governance of the corporation uses other peoples’ money to do things without accountability.” Like Madoff decades before, SEC Chair nominee Atkins noted that “[SBF] was not accountable to anyone, there was no board.”

But innovation aside, there is still the fundamental question of whether crypto qualifies as a security and appropriate for SEC regulation. While the SEC under Chairman Gensler and defense counsel fought vigorously over whether crypto did or did not meet the Howey test,[2] a case decided over 60 years before Satoshi Nakamoto first implemented the blockchain, SEC Chair nominee Atkins presented a different view: he noted that the Howey case is “quite old, it’s arguable whether or not it’s still current…I could see the Supreme Court reexamining that for its coherence to the current environment and whether or not it needs to be tweaked.” In the meantime, while the regulatory issues are being resolved, SEC Chair nominee Atkins signaled that the cryptocurrency industry needed certainty in regulation akin to the SEC’s current safe harbor rules for securities offerings: “Safe harbors have done a good job in giving certainty to industry and of course in this particular industry [cryptocurrency] we need certainty, of course there’s a dearth of that now.”[3]

As someone who is committed to promoting innovation and workable regulation, while prosecuting real bad actors, it is no wonder the markets and commentators have applauded the nomination of Paul Atkins so loudly.

[1] See Keep Your Government Hands Off My Crypto | Guest: Paul Atkins | Ep 215 – YouTube.

[2] Sec. and Exch. Comm’n v. W.J. Howey Co., 328 U.S. 293 (1946).

[3] See The Capital ’19: Fireside Chat with Paul Atkins, Former Commissioner, U.S. SEC – YouTube.

November 14, 2024 by Duane Morris

Impact of the Presidential Election on the Future of Digital Assets in the United States

By Vincent J. Nolan III

During his first term in office, President Trump expressed skepticism about cryptocurrencies, saying that he was “not a fan” and that they were based on “thin air.” However, statements made during the campaign leading to his election on November 5, as well as his family’s involvement in the crypto space, indicate that the new Trump administration now holds a favorable stance toward the industry. The post-election rally in cryptocurrency markets certainly indicates that the industry believes that the incoming Trump administration will be pro-crypto.

In this post, we will explore what the future of cryptocurrency might look like under a Trump-led government, how regulatory changes could unfold, and the potential timeline for meaningful reform.

1. A Pro-Crypto Administration

Based on his campaign rhetoric and the Trump family’s increasing involvement in crypto, it appears that President Trump will be a more crypto-friendly president than his predecessor. For example, his policy proposals have included the following:

Aggressively encouraging Bitcoin mining by having – in his words — “all the remaining Bitcoin to be MADE IN THE USA;”
Creating a strategic Bitcoin reserve to eliminate the $35-plus trillion U.S. debt;
Preventing the creation of a central bank digital currency; and
Eliminating oppressive regulation in the crypto space by, in part, firing U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Gary Gensler “on day one.”

While not all campaign promises become reality, it is likely that the new Trump administration will take an aggressively supportive stance toward cryptocurrency.

2. The SEC Under Fire

On the campaign trail, President-elect Trump pledged to the industry that he will fire SEC Chair Gary Gensler “on day one.” We would expect that Trump will attempt to carry out this promise immediately.

Under Gensler, the SEC has classified many digital assets as securities and, as a result, brought and litigated multiple cases against major crypto exchanges, projects and developers for allegedly selling unregistered securities and other alleged violations. This has led to tension with the crypto industry, with complaints that the SEC is regulating the industry through enforcement, that the regulatory environment is not clear, and that these efforts have impeded innovation and development of the crypto economy.

Whether President Trump can actually or effectively fire Gensler immediately remains to be seen. Gensler’s term currently runs through June 5, 2026, and, having been appointed and confirmed by the Senate, he can only be fired for cause. But as p.resident in his first term, Trump demonstrated that he did not want to be bound by the niceties of the federal appointment process and would creatively work to achieve his ends.

3. Congressional Movement Towards Crypto-Friendly Legislation

The U.S. crypto industry has been pushing hard for regulatory clarity. While the executive branch can take significant steps to shape policy, legislative action will be crucial for ensuring the long-term stability and growth of the crypto industry.

During his presidential campaign, President Trump declared that he will be a pro-crypto president. But it is important to recognize that the crypto industry’s political efforts were not limited to the presidential race and, as a result, over 250 (self-proclaimed) “pro-crypto” candidates were elected to Congress.

Under a Trump-led government, we would expect to see a concerted effort from both the administration and Congress to pass legislation that recognizes cryptocurrency as a legitimate asset class and establishes clear rules for its use and taxation, building upon prior efforts such as the passage of the Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act in May 2024 by the House. By highlighting the economic potential of crypto and the need for the U.S. to remain competitive in the global digital economy, the Trump administration could leverage the first truly pro-crypto Congress to pass crypto-friendly legislation that clarifies the legal framework for digital assets.

4. A 12-18 Month Timeline for Crypto Legitimization

Regardless of what happens with the SEC chair, if the Trump administration successfully drives legislative action, we could see significant changes within the next 12 to 18 months.

New legislation that brings regulatory clarity could create new opportunities in the following ways:

Open the door for traditional financial institutions, including banks and large investment firms, to participate more actively in the crypto space. These institutions have largely been sidelined due to regulatory uncertainty and the risk of non-compliance with existing laws. Once a clear legal framework is established, these institutions would have more incentive to offer crypto-related products and services, such as custody, trading, and even crypto-based financial products;
Retail investors could benefit from greater legitimacy and protections within the crypto market;
It could lead to a surge in retail adoption, further driving the price and mainstream acceptance of digital assets; and
Losses in crypto and blockchain development to Asian markets could be reversed and the U.S. could again become a haven for innovation in the crypto space.

Conclusion: Crypto’s Bright Future in a Trump Administration

In summary, a second term for Donald Trump could be a game-changer for the cryptocurrency industry in the U.S. With a pro-crypto stance, potential changes at the SEC, and the push for favorable legislation, the next 12 to 18 months could see crypto move from a fringe asset class to a mainstream financial tool. The Trump administration’s focus on deregulation and fostering innovation, combined with pressure from industry stakeholders and the broader financial sector, could help pave the way for a more robust and legitimate cryptocurrency market in the U.S.

August 14, 2024December 4, 2024 by Duane Morris

District Judge Imposes $125 million fine on Ripple Labs, Demanding No Future Securities Law Infringements after 3-plus year battle with SEC

By Mauro Wolfe

In the ongoing legal saga between Ripple Labs Inc. and the SEC, U.S. District Judge Analisa Torres of the Southern District of New York imposed a $125 million fine on Ripple Labs, a provider of digital asset infrastructure for financial services, and restrained the company from violating U.S. securities laws in the future.

The SEC v. Ripple Labs case is a significant precedent in the cryptocurrency and commercial finance legal communities. The dispute centered around whether Ripple’s sale of XRP – a cryptocurrency developed, issued and partially managed by Ripple – constituted an unregistered securities offering. The SEC contended that XRP should be classified as a security, and therefore Ripple should have registered its transactions with the SEC. However, Ripple argued that XRP is a digital currency and not a security, asserting that the SEC’s application of securities laws to XRP was inappropriate and harmful to innovation in the cryptocurrency space.

On December 22, 2020, the SEC filed an action against Ripple and two of its executives for allegedly using an unregistered digital asset security to raise funds. The SEC charged the defendants with violating the registration provisions of the Securities Act of 1933, seeking injunctive relief, disgorgement with prejudgment interest and civil penalties.

The SEC’s lawsuit stated that Ripple and the two executives started raising funds in 2013 by selling XRP digital assets to investors in the United States and other countries in an unregistered, ongoing digital asset securities offering. The term “unregistered” is key to the SEC’s allegations because the agency’s argument centered around the nature of XRP as digital asset securities and not as a simple cryptocurrency. Additionally, Ripple allegedly gave out billions of XRP in exchange for activities like market-making and labor, contrary to a monetary compensation. In consequence, the complaint alleged that the defendants violated the federal securities laws’ registration requirements by not registering or not meeting any of the exemptions to register these kind of transactions.

Ripple disagreed, arguing that it was not adequately notified of its purported violations of registration regulations. Reluctant to categorize XRP as a security, Ripple defiantly challenged the SEC in federal court. Ultimately, the court was not persuaded with this argument entirely.

In Judge Torres’ decision on July 13, 2023, the court held that XRP “is not in and of itself ‘a contract, transaction, or scheme’ that embodies the Howey requirements of an investment contract.” Ultimately, the court found that Ripple violated the securities laws in its transactions aimed to offer XRP to institutional buyers such as hedge funds. As we have written in other blog posts, the court held that the secondary market transactions were not securities. Other courts have not followed Judge Torres’ analysis as to secondary markets. The disagreement between trial level courts in various cases leaves ultimate resolution on the application of the Howey test to cryptocurrencies to the federal appellate courts and most likely the U.S. Supreme Court, unless congressional legislation arrives first.

Following the summary judgment order from a year ago, the District Court issued the final judgment on August 7, 2024, after nearly four years of litigation. The court’s summary judgment found that some of Ripple’s transactions involving the exchange or sale of XRP were not considered in violation of the securities laws. However, the court held that XRP tokens sold to institutional investors were in violation of Howey, and awarded the SEC with $125 million civil monetary penalty and issued an injunction barring the company from future violations of Section 5 of the Securities Act.

This decision highlights the ongoing challenges that crypto markets face with regard to U.S. law and regulation. In effect, law and regulation lag behind the pace of industry.

The murky U.S. legal and regulatory landscape makes for challenges for the crypto markets and its participants. While other foreign countries are developing new laws and regulations, the sector waits for the creation of the U.S. crypto framework.

Once that happens, the United States may yet have a chance to be the leading crypto market in the world.

Special thanks to law clerk Laila Salame Khouri for her assistance with this blog post.

August 9, 2024 by Duane Morris

U.K. Law Commission Adds Another Powerful Voice in Support of Crypto

By Mauro Wolfe and Kourosh Jahansouz

Since the publication of Satoshi Nakamoto’s bitcoin white paper in October 2008, the digital asset space has seen exponential adoption and growth. From crypto tokens to NFTs, citizens around the world are continuing to show a deep interest in possessing digital assets.

In 2021, the Law Commission of the United Kingdom began considering how principals of personal property law interact with the ever-growing digital asset space. Traditionally, the law of England and Wales recognizes two distinct categories of personal property rights:

Rights relating to things in possession (tangible things); and
Rights related to things in action (legal rights or claims enforceable by action)

In February 2024, the Law Commission put forth a draft legislative proposal and bill that aimed at statutorily recognizing a third category of property rights. The Law Commission explained that over the last 10 years, common law has moved toward the recognition of a third category of personal property rights that does not easily fall within either of the two traditional categories. Notably, digital assets do not sit easily in either of the traditionally recognized categories of things in possession or things in action. For this reason, the Law Commission recommended legislation to confirm the existence of a third category of personal property rights, capable of accommodating certain digital assets, including crypto tokens.

Then, on July 29, 2024, the Law Commission published a supplemental report in which it put forth amendments to the draft legislation and provided further explanations behind its proposals. Under this report, a new Property Act (Digital Assets etc.) would be implemented to “make provision about the types of things that are capable of being objects of personal property rights.”

The Property Act provides that “a thing (including a thing that is digital or electronic in nature) is not prevented from being the object of personal property rights merely because it is neither a thing in possession, nor a thing in action”―leaving it to the courts of England and Wales to further define what “things” would qualify for this third new category of property over time.

The draft bill is not intended to confirm that any particular type of thing is the object of third category of personal property rights or set out the implications of any such property rights. Rather, it merely clarifies that things other than things in possession or things in action are capable of being the object of property rights. Broadly speaking, however, a thing will fall within the third category if it:

Is functionally analogous to those things that attract property rights and is itself capable of attracting property rights; and
Is not comfortably either a thing in possession or thing in action.

Further, the supplemental report acknowledges that some things will not fall within this criteria. For example:

Pure information, being the intangible, abstract thing that is information, distinct from the means by or on which that information is recorded;
Certain digital assets, such as digital files and records, email accounts and certain in-game assets and domain names.

The legislation landscape for the digital asset space continues to evolve rapidly every year. In 2024, the European Union passed a landmark set of rules, Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA), which created an expansive and rigorous regulatory framework for virtual value, including financial crime compliance duties, for crypto assets, service providers and currency exchanges. The U.K. Law Commission’s policy support for crypto shows key global support for crypto.

Meanwhile, in the United States, the House of Representatives passed a bill in May 2024 seeking to create a legal framework for digital assets, the Financial Innovation and Technology for the 21st Century Act (H.R. 4763). There has been no movement on this since May.

As such, it is anticipated that perhaps in 2025 we may see legislation in the U.S., which will signify the maturation and legitimacy of the crypto markets.

Duane Morris will continue to monitor the legislative landscape for the digital asset space as it continues to develop.

October 10, 2023 by Duane Morris

Webinar: U.S. Law Enforcement Targets Crypto in Asia: The Tiger in the Grass ‒ What Every Crypto Actor Must Know Now

Duane Morris will present U.S. Law Enforcement Targets Crypto in Asia: The Tiger in the Grass ‒ What Every Crypto Actor Must Know Now on Thursday, November 30, 2023, from 10:00 a.m. to 11:00 a.m. Singapore.

About the Program

Crypto entrepreneurs and their financers and advisers are facing unprecedented enforcement activity from the U.S. government, including the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ). The SEC, in particular, has taken an aggressive stance in applying U.S. securities law to internationally based cryptocurrencies, and international players in the crypto market are routinely being called to defend themselves in U.S.-based investigations and U.S. courts.

In this webinar, a Duane Morris team will discuss the basis for the SEC and DOJ’s assertion of jurisdiction over international actors so that crypto players can determine whether their actions may lead to the need to comply with U.S. securities laws. The panel will also discuss the various U.S. laws that could be triggered so that foreign crypto actors become more acquainted with U.S. laws and regulations. The focus of the webinar is to educate crypto players enough so that they understand the risks.

Speakers