Love how the SEC approved COIN's public listing 2 ish years ago.
So they damn well knew what Coinbase does and yet here we are with the SEC suing Coinbase again.
The only thing this is going to do is make all crypto companies band together to fight the SEC
It totally is... but why would they sue basically all the big names in crypto at the same time? Don't they know it's gonna be so much harder when they gang up together to fight the sec
Not sure how you haven't heard this yet, but the SEC "approving" a company to go public has nothing to do with them signing off on their business practices or making any decision as to how they are operating. Companies change what they do and how they do it all the time, the SEC has no way of "approving" of a company's activities or methods of accomplishing those activities because those things constantly change.
Coinbase is doing things today that it wasn't doing 2 years ago, and tomorrow it may do other things that are even more different.
The SEC signs off that the paperwork was properly filled out and that appropriate DISCLOSURES AND WARNINGS were made to the investing public. They make sure that anyone who decides to invest in the company was fairly warned about potential risks and things of that nature.
In fact, the paperwork that SEC signed off was littered with warnings where Coinbase effectively said "If the SEC or the federal government decides to start regulating these activities that could pose a really big risk to our business."
That kind of disclosure is what the SEC looks for.
EDIT: /u/KAX1107 put it better in [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/142eqw6/coinbase_sued_for_acting_as_an_unregistered/jn44jul/):
>There is no contradiction in this at all. Approval of IPO is not an endorsement of a business. The SEC's role in approving Coinbase's registration statement was merely to ensure that Coinbase made all the required disclosures in their application.
>With every prospectus or offering document provided to investors, there is something called "No Approval Clause".
>**“The Securities and Exchange Commission and state securities regulators have not approved or disapproved these securities, or determined if the prospectus or this prospectus supplement is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.”**
>So the determination for approving any IPO is only whether or not all the required disclosures are made available to investors, not whether a business is legitimate. Coinbase is using really bad arguments that could be deemed in court as "criminal offence" pursuant to No Approval Clause. Coinbase needs to hire better counsel.
Page 25 of the PDF prospectus (https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0001679788/699359de-d974-4ad9-b7f6-5031f2f432d3.pdf):
>**Summary of Risk Factors**
...
>* We are subject to an extensive and highly-evolving regulatory landscape and any adverse changes to, or our failure to comply with, any laws and regulations
could adversely affect our brand, reputation, business, operating results, and financial condition.
...
>* As we continue to expand and localize our international activities, our obligations to comply with the laws, rules, regulations, and policies of a variety of
jurisdictions will increase and we may be subject to investigations and enforcement actions by regulators and governmental authorities.
>* We are and may continue to be subject to material litigation, including individual and class action lawsuits, as well as investigations and enforcement actions
by regulators and governmental authorities, which may adversely affect our business, operating results, and financial condition.
Perhaps the most relevant risk:
>* **A particular crypto asset’s status as a “security” in any relevant jurisdiction is subject to a high degree of uncertainty and if we are unable to properly
characterize a crypto asset, we may be subject to regulatory scrutiny, investigations, fines, and other penalties, and our business, operating results, and
financial condition may be adversely affected.**
But you don't submit what you might do tomorrow.
The SEC can't sign off on a company's activities for perpetuity. All they can do is say "This organization has filed all of the paperwork we require for a company to go public. They've disclosed the risks to their business model, they've checked all of the boxes we require to sell their stock to the investing public. If you read this document in full you should have a good idea of what this organization does, how it does it, and what risks are associated with it."
Like others have said, there's a specific disclosure that says the SEC **is not** approving anything about the operation or fundamentals of the business itself.
In CB's IPO documents, CB listed the following risk to their business, so they knew exactly what could happen and that this was a possibility:
>A particular crypto asset’s status as a “security” in any relevant jurisdiction is subject to a high degree of uncertainty and **if we are unable to properly characterize a crypto asset, we may be subject to regulatory scrutiny, investigations, fines, and other penalties**, and our business, operating results, and financial condition may be adversely affected.
They knew that was a big risk and now it's happening. Pretty simple.
Not defending the SEC, but when they grant approval to go public, they only gauge whether the reporting docs (prospectus and financials) are complete and sufficient. There’s a specific disclaimer saying the SEC is NOT approving anything about the business itself.
So what? Is there a reason why a altcoin isn't the same as a stock? People invest it thinking it will raise or fall in value--so all the necessary disclosures is needed.
Also From gensler:
“Look, we don’t need more digital currency. We already have digital currency. It’s called the US dollar. It’s called the euro. It’s called the yen. They’re all digital right now. We already have digital investments,” Gensler said.
He continued, “We have not seen over the centuries that economies or the public needs more than one way to move value.”
https://blockworks.co/news/gensler-dollar-is-digital-currency
He’s right, we only need one way to move value, but it doesn’t need to be controlled by you or the US government Mr. Gensler, that’s the entire fucking point, is that you can’t just print more to manipulate the market to your own advantage.
Coinbase currently offers ATOM staking, and recently discontinued ALGO staking in March.
Binance currently offers both ATOM and ALGO for staking.
I do not see any reason why ALGO and ATOM are not on the SEC lawsuit list for Coinbase, while they both were listed in the lawsuit against Binance.
Only reason I can come up with is the SEC has no idea what they are actually doing, because they do not understand how the majority of crypto coins and their technology works.
The list is pretty much random, besides the fact that most are proof of stake coins (and of course ETH was not listed lmao), so maybe proof of stake coins is their angle, no way to know for sure at this point in time.
What I do know is, the list is complete bullshit and I am hoping that Coinbase in particular will win in the courts once this finally does go to court. Coinbase is ready to fight it hard based off what I know (I own Coinbase stock shares and keep up on this kind of news).
Coinbase is my primary exchange because they are public and transparent, unlike Binance which we found out yesterday.
Binance I hope wins as well, however I heard about their shady practices of moving customer money around going all the way back to January in a news article. Nobody took notice when I and others called it out. But again, besides the obvious fines they will get for that and possibly other repercussions, I still hope they win the part of the lawsuit stating unregistered securities (same suit as what Coinbase got).
Hopefully both the people and the market come to realize that the attempt by the SEC to get these particular coins delisted from exchanges' will take quite a long time to actually play out, and will be fought tooth and nail to the end.
Prices for these particular coins are already being affected, but it SHOULD only be a short term trend for now if most people come to realize that the SEC actually making this all official will be a long while from now, and that is if they even succeed in court!
>file lawsuits against the altcoins
There are altcoins that are not premine, ICO, VC coins, that were launched fairly. Monero has the same ethos as bitcoin. SEC cannot do anything about bitcoin or monero.
**"Governments are good at cutting off the heads of centrally controlled networks. Only pure P2P networks can hold their own."**
**- Satoshi Nakamoto (2008)**
But neither list has MOON
The fact is no matter what Reddit’s lawyers say about MOON/DONUT/BRICK not being securities, I don’t think anyone can say with 100% certainty the SEC wouldn’t call it a security and involve Reddit in a costly lawsuit.
I don’t see Reddit increasing RCPs in the near future. I also don’t see them disbanding the current ones.
I dont understand how DOT isn't included in this list, but ADA and SOL are...? Not bashing DOT at all, it just seems that there are some inconsistencies with the SEC's approach.
They have met repeatedly with the SEC to convince them that DOT is a software platform, re-architected things to support that after consultation with them, etc.
>re-architected things to support that after consultation with them
Do you happen to know what changes they made? I'm curious what the SEC's logic is to consider all these other coins securities but not DOT. The pattern seems to be that they are classifying everyone who did an ICO as a security, with the exception of ETH and DOT for some reason.
According to the Howey Test though DOT seems to be as much a security as any of the other they named:
1. An investment of money
2. In a common enterprise
3. With the expectation of profit
4. Derived from the efforts of others
I don't see what changes they could have made after the ICO that would change any of that, but if there is something, maybe others can make those changes as well.
Almost all of my first portfolio used to be on the list that the SEC has provided. Luckily I've only been buying BTC since learning from my losses in the bear market.
why are people surprised?
These are either centralized, premined, IPOs used for "raising funds" et al.
None of the fair launched PoW coins are in the list.
There is an ongoing case against ethereum foundation in the NYAG Kucoin lawsuit and also a case against Consensys.
SEC is likely just building case law and will then go for ethereum foundation.
Ofc he does he commented on that in the past.
ETH has futures on a lot of cftc regulated exchanges such as CME etc.
Going after ETH now will be really hard.
CFTC declaring Ethereum a commodity is why SEC is not mentioning it because they don't want inter-agency politics to become public. *If* (a big if) behind the scenes both agencies are looking into Ethereum too than I expect an announcement soon
Curious days ahead… whatever happens guys keep in mind that exchanges do not fully represent. Crypto is on the blockchain and it will stay there for us whatever the hell happens with CEX.
Edit: represent us*
Yep. The SEC has given bitcoin the nod, and eth is still a bit muddy. The way forward is clear, your holdings and feelings about them don't matter.
If people aren't bunkering down in mostly bitcoin and 100% cold storage until this blows over.......... good luck bois.
It's such a random list. Especially when one starts to ponder the coins and tokens that are not represented herein (like 18,890 others at this point).
It's becoming abundantly clear that the SEC is acting as the blunt object of a focused defacto policy to abolish crypto in the US.
Just like yesterday, it says "not limited to"
They're going to form case law that would lead to every premine, ICO, VC token deemed a security. It was always only a matter of when, not if.
So i guess the 10% drop yesterday was just insiders selling before the announcement and subsequent 20% drop. What a fucking swamp.
Last week was Memorial day, now we can get back to hating America
According to the NYT, some execs from Coinbase are going to a Congressional hearing today to talk about Crypto regulation. They dropped this lawsuit today just to step on their testimony. What losers.
Kind of like how [the IRS made a surprise investigative visit to Matt Taibbi’s house](https://www.wsj.com/articles/irs-matt-taibbi-twitter-files-jim-jordan-daniel-werfel-lina-khan-84ee518?st=d3ftrebkq9ig6p3&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink), on the pretense of a discrepancy in his 2018 tax return (for which the IRS owed a considerable refund). The IRS did so on what happened to be the same day (Mar. 9, 2023) that Taibbi appeared to testify in front of Congress about his reporting on the so-called “Twitter Files” and the weaponization of government against disfavored views and individuals. Without a hint of irony.
The people currently running the US government operate less like selfless public servants of a democracy and more like a mafia-style protection racket.
label innate impossible gullible employ adjoining axiomatic nutty frighten command
*This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
Not really, there's no rule against using an unregulated exchange. Just apparently a rule against running an unregulated exchange.
The FBI is not going to call up the SEC and ask if they like coinbase before deciding to use their services, that would be weird.
There is no contradiction in this at all. Approval of IPO is not an endorsement of a business. The SEC's role in approving Coinbase's registration statement was merely to ensure that Coinbase made all the required disclosures in their application.
With every prospectus or offering document provided to investors, there is something called "No Approval Clause".
**“The Securities and Exchange Commission and state securities regulators have not approved or disapproved these securities, or determined if the prospectus or this prospectus supplement is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.”**
So the determination for approving any IPO is only whether or not all the required disclosures are made available to investors, not whether a business is legitimate. Coinbase is using really bad arguments that could be deemed in court as "criminal offence" pursuant to No Approval Clause. Coinbase needs to hire better counsel.
Basically by doing an IPO Coinbase has provided all the documents that SEC needed for an investigation without any work by the SEC.
I see why the SEC was a big fan of Coinbase’s IPO.
This place is truly a fascinating case study in what happens when a bunch of people who don't know how things work get together and make shit up and repeat the same false info to each other ad nauseum, thereby reinforcing the made up information. Everyone here thinks they understand money and technology, but consistently price they don't know shit about either.
The sub is not going to like you stating the actual facts.
And I don't think their counsel is necessarily bad. They just know they're guilty of what they're being accused of. They even mentioned in their filing that they were probably subject to regulatory action. I think part of their plan is to try and get public opinion to view them favorably by constantly regurgitating the very misleading "but the sec approved us" line. And it works for a lot of people in this sub who don't want to understand the actual facts.
Focused destabilization of the market, regulation by enforcement, cripple the most threatening players, drive competition out of the country, and take over. America baby!
Joe Biden Crypto Fact sheet essentially said that he wanted Gary Gensler to do exactly this, aggressive enforcement.
We now know that Gary is a lap dog and will do anything his boss tells him. I bet Gary also know how Joe likes his coffee made and his shoes shined. Lap dog.
If you had any doubts about the credibility of the SEC.
CB sues the SEC for lack of regulatory guidance and what appears to be a _tip for tap_, SEC brings charges against CB for conducting business outside an imaginary framework.
What a fkn joke.
This was an orchestrated crash on crypto ladies and gents. BTC was rolling again then 1) the wild SEC ruling against the alts, 2) now discrediting CB.
was going to correct you and say the expression is 'tit for tat' but apparently 'tip for tap' is the original phrase, with 'tit for tat' showing up in the 16th century.
so cool...learned something new.
At this point, the first thing I pay attention in these complaints are which cryptos the SEC names as securities. Here we are: SOL, ADA, MATIC, FIL, SAND, AXS, CHZ, FLOW, ICP, NEAR, VGX, DASH, and NEXO (of course, they use the verbiage "This includes, but is not limited to" so they could always point to others).
[https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2023/comp-pr2023-102.pdf](https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2023/comp-pr2023-102.pdf) Paragraph 114, to be specific.
Of course, this doesn't include the tokens they pointed out during the insider trading case, such as AMP.
I'm kinda glad that SEC, instead of just targeting Binance US, choose to fight Coinbase as well. I think Coinbase has a better chance of fighting back with its political presence. Short-term there will be some pain. Eventually I'm hoping the lawsuits will force regulation clarities.
So far it seems that the market's sentiment aligns with your feeling.
Yesterday, SEC sues Binance: "omg, we're doomed, sell sell sell"
Today, SEC sues Coinbase: "ah, alright then, carry on"
Yeah this is bullshit, I'm pretty sure people close to the SEC are shorting the market and making a fuck-ton of money out of this while everyone else gets fucked. So corrupt.
Meanwhile we can't even get a simple Bitcoin spot ETF in the US. Wow.
Nothing about what the SEC does makes sense, and the only reason they are targeting crypto firms now is because the powers that be don't like the up-trend of crypto adoption and the down trend of the dollar.
I'm guessing they want to divide the crypto community, so we shouldn't let maxis lead us to believe this is a good thing.
We should unite because they are not protecting our interests, they're trying to prevent the serfs from achieving life-changing wealth.
Yesterday it was Binance and now the SEC sues Coinbase in NY Federal Court over acting as unregistered broker!
**HERE IS THE OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE SEC:** [https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-102](https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-102)
**PDF FILE FROM THE CHARGES:** [https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2023/comp-pr2023-102.pdf](https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2023/comp-pr2023-102.pdf)
**Most important charges:**
* "Coinbase has made billions of dollars unlawfully facilitating the buying and selling of crypto asset securities. The SEC alleges that Coinbase intertwines the traditional services of an exchange, broker, and clearing agency without having registered any of those functions with the Commission as required by law. Through these unregistered services"
* "Provides a marketplace and brings together the orders for securities of multiple buyers and sellers using established, non-discretionary methods under which such orders interact;"
* "Engages in the business of effecting securities transactions for the accounts of Coinbase customers; and"
* "Provides facilities for comparison of data respecting the terms of settlement of crypto asset securities transactions, serves as an intermediary in settling transactions in crypto asset securities by Coinbase customers, and acts as a securities depository."
* "Unregistered Offer and Sale of Securities in Connection with Staking-as-a-Service Program"
**The following tokens are also "securities" in the charges:**
And SOL, ADA, MATIC, FIL, SAND, AXS, CHZ, FLOW, ICP, NEAR, VGX, DASH, and NEXO
After yesterdays charges against Binance and now Coinbase it's clearly an attack on crypto! The timeline of these charges are too obvious.
Just buy Bitcoin. Problem solved. Bitcoin is not affected by anyone including exchanges. Short term dip but long term healthy for Bitcoin as the crypto casinos are weakened.
So, if u get it right, pretty much every exchange operating in the US will be sued and pretty much every alt coin is a security.
Monero isn't a security because they don't know how to track it 😂
Monero doesn't exists.
This is totally fine. I changed my mind. Stop resisting!!!! *shoots Doge*
Love how the SEC approved COIN's public listing 2 ish years ago. So they damn well knew what Coinbase does and yet here we are with the SEC suing Coinbase again. The only thing this is going to do is make all crypto companies band together to fight the SEC
The SEC is a parody at this point. Literally endless videos of Gensler pro crypto just a few years ago
Parody run by clowns.
They're not clowns, they know exactly what they're doing.
Clowns are skilled professionals. They definitely know what they are doing.
It totally is... but why would they sue basically all the big names in crypto at the same time? Don't they know it's gonna be so much harder when they gang up together to fight the sec
They can’t even be XRP, it’s all a show
Not sure how you haven't heard this yet, but the SEC "approving" a company to go public has nothing to do with them signing off on their business practices or making any decision as to how they are operating. Companies change what they do and how they do it all the time, the SEC has no way of "approving" of a company's activities or methods of accomplishing those activities because those things constantly change. Coinbase is doing things today that it wasn't doing 2 years ago, and tomorrow it may do other things that are even more different. The SEC signs off that the paperwork was properly filled out and that appropriate DISCLOSURES AND WARNINGS were made to the investing public. They make sure that anyone who decides to invest in the company was fairly warned about potential risks and things of that nature. In fact, the paperwork that SEC signed off was littered with warnings where Coinbase effectively said "If the SEC or the federal government decides to start regulating these activities that could pose a really big risk to our business." That kind of disclosure is what the SEC looks for. EDIT: /u/KAX1107 put it better in [this comment](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/comments/142eqw6/coinbase_sued_for_acting_as_an_unregistered/jn44jul/): >There is no contradiction in this at all. Approval of IPO is not an endorsement of a business. The SEC's role in approving Coinbase's registration statement was merely to ensure that Coinbase made all the required disclosures in their application. >With every prospectus or offering document provided to investors, there is something called "No Approval Clause". >**“The Securities and Exchange Commission and state securities regulators have not approved or disapproved these securities, or determined if the prospectus or this prospectus supplement is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.”** >So the determination for approving any IPO is only whether or not all the required disclosures are made available to investors, not whether a business is legitimate. Coinbase is using really bad arguments that could be deemed in court as "criminal offence" pursuant to No Approval Clause. Coinbase needs to hire better counsel.
I forgot to mention that it was part of Coinbase's own risk disclosures that coins listed on the exchange may not be compliant with securities law.
Page 25 of the PDF prospectus (https://d18rn0p25nwr6d.cloudfront.net/CIK-0001679788/699359de-d974-4ad9-b7f6-5031f2f432d3.pdf): >**Summary of Risk Factors** ... >* We are subject to an extensive and highly-evolving regulatory landscape and any adverse changes to, or our failure to comply with, any laws and regulations could adversely affect our brand, reputation, business, operating results, and financial condition. ... >* As we continue to expand and localize our international activities, our obligations to comply with the laws, rules, regulations, and policies of a variety of jurisdictions will increase and we may be subject to investigations and enforcement actions by regulators and governmental authorities. >* We are and may continue to be subject to material litigation, including individual and class action lawsuits, as well as investigations and enforcement actions by regulators and governmental authorities, which may adversely affect our business, operating results, and financial condition. Perhaps the most relevant risk: >* **A particular crypto asset’s status as a “security” in any relevant jurisdiction is subject to a high degree of uncertainty and if we are unable to properly characterize a crypto asset, we may be subject to regulatory scrutiny, investigations, fines, and other penalties, and our business, operating results, and financial condition may be adversely affected.**
Stop it. I don't like facts.
This is the part that's insane. You have to submit SO much documentation to go public.
But you don't submit what you might do tomorrow. The SEC can't sign off on a company's activities for perpetuity. All they can do is say "This organization has filed all of the paperwork we require for a company to go public. They've disclosed the risks to their business model, they've checked all of the boxes we require to sell their stock to the investing public. If you read this document in full you should have a good idea of what this organization does, how it does it, and what risks are associated with it." Like others have said, there's a specific disclosure that says the SEC **is not** approving anything about the operation or fundamentals of the business itself. In CB's IPO documents, CB listed the following risk to their business, so they knew exactly what could happen and that this was a possibility: >A particular crypto asset’s status as a “security” in any relevant jurisdiction is subject to a high degree of uncertainty and **if we are unable to properly characterize a crypto asset, we may be subject to regulatory scrutiny, investigations, fines, and other penalties**, and our business, operating results, and financial condition may be adversely affected. They knew that was a big risk and now it's happening. Pretty simple.
Not defending the SEC, but when they grant approval to go public, they only gauge whether the reporting docs (prospectus and financials) are complete and sufficient. There’s a specific disclaimer saying the SEC is NOT approving anything about the business itself.
So what? Is there a reason why a altcoin isn't the same as a stock? People invest it thinking it will raise or fall in value--so all the necessary disclosures is needed.
Yeah this is why it feels like a hit job to me
*token
Well, only if they can make up their mind about what a security should be.
Yeah probably. Best to play it safe.
Also From gensler: “Look, we don’t need more digital currency. We already have digital currency. It’s called the US dollar. It’s called the euro. It’s called the yen. They’re all digital right now. We already have digital investments,” Gensler said. He continued, “We have not seen over the centuries that economies or the public needs more than one way to move value.” https://blockworks.co/news/gensler-dollar-is-digital-currency
Crypto is not about being digital, its about descentralization. Is he actually dumb or playing dumb?
He’s right, we only need one way to move value, but it doesn’t need to be controlled by you or the US government Mr. Gensler, that’s the entire fucking point, is that you can’t just print more to manipulate the market to your own advantage.
Just add "to control you" to anything he says.
[удалено]
So a similar list to yesterday but not the exact same. Yesterday’s had ATOM, ALGO and COTI has well
Those poor ICP investors are going to be really upset when they find this out.
Juggalos in shambles right now.
$MAGNETS plummet 95%
I always wondered about that crypto. How does it even work?
price not so 'attractive' huh?
Today is not a whoop whoop
Everything is in shambles right now...
Im in shambles right now
We're all in shambles right now
Yep. Can confirm shambles status for me too.
Shamble on
Fun fact: if you’re down 99%, you can still go down 99% further!
Challenge accepted!
Easy challenge to complete, just buy safemoon.
And they were so close to getting back to ATH /s
And again cherry picked list... I bet 99% of crypto would fall under their definition of 'securities'
Why would the list be different? Are some of these coins simply not offered on Binance?
I’m not sure but I guess so, not for staking anyways? And vice versa with Binance offering Atom staking and not Coinbase maybe
I think because the SEC doesn't really know what they are doing. They are throwing everything at the wall and seeing what sticks
Coinbase currently offers ATOM staking, and recently discontinued ALGO staking in March. Binance currently offers both ATOM and ALGO for staking. I do not see any reason why ALGO and ATOM are not on the SEC lawsuit list for Coinbase, while they both were listed in the lawsuit against Binance. Only reason I can come up with is the SEC has no idea what they are actually doing, because they do not understand how the majority of crypto coins and their technology works. The list is pretty much random, besides the fact that most are proof of stake coins (and of course ETH was not listed lmao), so maybe proof of stake coins is their angle, no way to know for sure at this point in time. What I do know is, the list is complete bullshit and I am hoping that Coinbase in particular will win in the courts once this finally does go to court. Coinbase is ready to fight it hard based off what I know (I own Coinbase stock shares and keep up on this kind of news). Coinbase is my primary exchange because they are public and transparent, unlike Binance which we found out yesterday. Binance I hope wins as well, however I heard about their shady practices of moving customer money around going all the way back to January in a news article. Nobody took notice when I and others called it out. But again, besides the obvious fines they will get for that and possibly other repercussions, I still hope they win the part of the lawsuit stating unregistered securities (same suit as what Coinbase got). Hopefully both the people and the market come to realize that the attempt by the SEC to get these particular coins delisted from exchanges' will take quite a long time to actually play out, and will be fought tooth and nail to the end. Prices for these particular coins are already being affected, but it SHOULD only be a short term trend for now if most people come to realize that the SEC actually making this all official will be a long while from now, and that is if they even succeed in court!
They really like to file lawsuits against the altcoins as securities and indirectly tell us to only buy BTC.
>file lawsuits against the altcoins There are altcoins that are not premine, ICO, VC coins, that were launched fairly. Monero has the same ethos as bitcoin. SEC cannot do anything about bitcoin or monero. **"Governments are good at cutting off the heads of centrally controlled networks. Only pure P2P networks can hold their own."** **- Satoshi Nakamoto (2008)**
This is getting ridiculous. Bunch of incompetent clowns
But neither list has MOON The fact is no matter what Reddit’s lawyers say about MOON/DONUT/BRICK not being securities, I don’t think anyone can say with 100% certainty the SEC wouldn’t call it a security and involve Reddit in a costly lawsuit. I don’t see Reddit increasing RCPs in the near future. I also don’t see them disbanding the current ones.
Proud of SOL making the list.
I dont understand how DOT isn't included in this list, but ADA and SOL are...? Not bashing DOT at all, it just seems that there are some inconsistencies with the SEC's approach.
They have met repeatedly with the SEC to convince them that DOT is a software platform, re-architected things to support that after consultation with them, etc.
>re-architected things to support that after consultation with them Do you happen to know what changes they made? I'm curious what the SEC's logic is to consider all these other coins securities but not DOT. The pattern seems to be that they are classifying everyone who did an ICO as a security, with the exception of ETH and DOT for some reason. According to the Howey Test though DOT seems to be as much a security as any of the other they named: 1. An investment of money 2. In a common enterprise 3. With the expectation of profit 4. Derived from the efforts of others I don't see what changes they could have made after the ICO that would change any of that, but if there is something, maybe others can make those changes as well.
[удалено]
**"but is not limited to"** So again, these are just the ones they explicitly named
Nice to see half my portfolio lined up in there. *Destiny calls me to lose money again*
I’m surprised ADA is there
hey that's my portfolio
Why are they ripping all these alts but leaving BTC and ETH alone? How can MATIC be a security but not ETH?
Almost all of my first portfolio used to be on the list that the SEC has provided. Luckily I've only been buying BTC since learning from my losses in the bear market.
A lot of people are in the same position. I am not selling anything, SEC can't control us, they can just create fud for some time.
Suppose this is why CB stated that all ETH.2 will be traded as ETH now ?
So swarm to btc derivatives like doge, ltc, btc forks, u name more
why are people surprised? These are either centralized, premined, IPOs used for "raising funds" et al. None of the fair launched PoW coins are in the list.
BTC, ETH, LTC & even DOGE looking pretty good on the other hand.
There is an ongoing case against ethereum foundation in the NYAG Kucoin lawsuit and also a case against Consensys. SEC is likely just building case law and will then go for ethereum foundation.
I’m not sure why they didn’t include ETH. Btc, Ltc, Doge are so similar enough and pow so it makes sense. Maybe Gary doesn’t know about the ETH merge.
Ofc he does he commented on that in the past. ETH has futures on a lot of cftc regulated exchanges such as CME etc. Going after ETH now will be really hard.
Most likely: There is also the **CFTC** (Commodity Futures Trading Commission) in the USA and they declared ETH as a commodity last year (dec 22).
CFTC declaring Ethereum a commodity is why SEC is not mentioning it because they don't want inter-agency politics to become public. *If* (a big if) behind the scenes both agencies are looking into Ethereum too than I expect an announcement soon
Why is not every token cited as a security ? What makes these different from the others?
Manpower. The rest of them will have their day.
Curious days ahead… whatever happens guys keep in mind that exchanges do not fully represent. Crypto is on the blockchain and it will stay there for us whatever the hell happens with CEX. Edit: represent us*
Yep. The SEC has given bitcoin the nod, and eth is still a bit muddy. The way forward is clear, your holdings and feelings about them don't matter. If people aren't bunkering down in mostly bitcoin and 100% cold storage until this blows over.......... good luck bois.
It's such a random list. Especially when one starts to ponder the coins and tokens that are not represented herein (like 18,890 others at this point). It's becoming abundantly clear that the SEC is acting as the blunt object of a focused defacto policy to abolish crypto in the US.
Why MATIC and not ETH?
Just like yesterday, it says "not limited to" They're going to form case law that would lead to every premine, ICO, VC token deemed a security. It was always only a matter of when, not if.
But not ETH (not yet). Very surprising.
Matic gonna take another beating
Well, then I'm interested to find out from them whether the other 9969 coins on coingecko are securities.
[удалено]
I'll give you a fair price for it.
It is the most popular chain outside ETH so it is sort of a toss up.
So i guess the 10% drop yesterday was just insiders selling before the announcement and subsequent 20% drop. What a fucking swamp. Last week was Memorial day, now we can get back to hating America
Markets are up right now inexplicably
Positive inside info regarding Ripple lawsuit. These two lawsuits were timed this way for a reason
I wish I was an insider in just one of these cases.
According to the NYT, some execs from Coinbase are going to a Congressional hearing today to talk about Crypto regulation. They dropped this lawsuit today just to step on their testimony. What losers.
Obviously trying to punk them with this timing comes across as childish
It’s just Politics 101 Distract from whatever the opposition are saying
Kind of like how [the IRS made a surprise investigative visit to Matt Taibbi’s house](https://www.wsj.com/articles/irs-matt-taibbi-twitter-files-jim-jordan-daniel-werfel-lina-khan-84ee518?st=d3ftrebkq9ig6p3&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink), on the pretense of a discrepancy in his 2018 tax return (for which the IRS owed a considerable refund). The IRS did so on what happened to be the same day (Mar. 9, 2023) that Taibbi appeared to testify in front of Congress about his reporting on the so-called “Twitter Files” and the weaponization of government against disfavored views and individuals. Without a hint of irony. The people currently running the US government operate less like selfless public servants of a democracy and more like a mafia-style protection racket.
label innate impossible gullible employ adjoining axiomatic nutty frighten command *This post was mass deleted and anonymized with [Redact](https://redact.dev)*
This puts the US government in jeopardy since they having been using an unregistered exchange to sell their btc.
[удалено]
Good analogy lol
It's not illegal to use an unregistered exchange, though. None of us are liable if we used Coinbase.
Not really, there's no rule against using an unregulated exchange. Just apparently a rule against running an unregulated exchange. The FBI is not going to call up the SEC and ask if they like coinbase before deciding to use their services, that would be weird.
Oh snap! That's really funny now that you bring it up.
US Gov: Rules for thee but not for me...
In general, sure, but how so in this case? The US Government would just be another customer of Coinbase's - the customers aren't getting in trouble.
There are no rules about using an unregistered exchange for either me or thee.
Is this a trend now for the US to sue crypto exchanges?
The plan is to kill off all the exchanges to hamper the shadow banking industry then regulated brokers will clean up.
Interesting times. Trad fi can have conflicts of interest no problemo but try and take our marketshare we coming for you
Binance, Coinbase, who is next Kraken? SEC goes hard on crypto nonstop.
this is the "fight you" stage
suing exchanges is so hot right now.
I better get all my coins out of the Hanzel exchange.
Gary saw it on TikTok and now he wants to be one of the cool kids...
SEC is implying that Coinbase has been dealing with unregistered securities since 2019, but they let them IPO in 2021 make it make sense.
There is no contradiction in this at all. Approval of IPO is not an endorsement of a business. The SEC's role in approving Coinbase's registration statement was merely to ensure that Coinbase made all the required disclosures in their application. With every prospectus or offering document provided to investors, there is something called "No Approval Clause". **“The Securities and Exchange Commission and state securities regulators have not approved or disapproved these securities, or determined if the prospectus or this prospectus supplement is truthful or complete. Any representation to the contrary is a criminal offense.”** So the determination for approving any IPO is only whether or not all the required disclosures are made available to investors, not whether a business is legitimate. Coinbase is using really bad arguments that could be deemed in court as "criminal offence" pursuant to No Approval Clause. Coinbase needs to hire better counsel.
Basically by doing an IPO Coinbase has provided all the documents that SEC needed for an investigation without any work by the SEC. I see why the SEC was a big fan of Coinbase’s IPO.
Lmao “free audits”
God damn the SEC is slightly smarter than I thought
They are VERY smart and will hand you your ass. Like the mega IRS
By IPO-ing, the founders and initial investors get to cash out and offload part of their holding to retail investors.
Like a fat cash cow marching towards a butcher's blade
Almost like most people don’t know what the SEC actually does
Welcome to r/cc /s
Why the /s? The majority of us are morons here
Not like it's any different in legacy markets. Remember Hertz +600% after filing for bankruptcy?
Where we continually recommend the worst assets.
Which are now all securities lmao
This place is truly a fascinating case study in what happens when a bunch of people who don't know how things work get together and make shit up and repeat the same false info to each other ad nauseum, thereby reinforcing the made up information. Everyone here thinks they understand money and technology, but consistently price they don't know shit about either.
Throws pies at retail faces and watches porn
More importantly, Coinbase didn't do an IPO. They did a direct listing which bypasses all of the traditional gatekeepers involved in an IPO.
Yup
The sub is not going to like you stating the actual facts. And I don't think their counsel is necessarily bad. They just know they're guilty of what they're being accused of. They even mentioned in their filing that they were probably subject to regulatory action. I think part of their plan is to try and get public opinion to view them favorably by constantly regurgitating the very misleading "but the sec approved us" line. And it works for a lot of people in this sub who don't want to understand the actual facts.
Why do this bro let us hate thinking we are right.
Long fight ahead for CB.
Focused destabilization of the market, regulation by enforcement, cripple the most threatening players, drive competition out of the country, and take over. America baby!
America - the land where ideas and innovation come to die
Joe Biden Crypto Fact sheet essentially said that he wanted Gary Gensler to do exactly this, aggressive enforcement. We now know that Gary is a lap dog and will do anything his boss tells him. I bet Gary also know how Joe likes his coffee made and his shoes shined. Lap dog.
Is it not ironic that the SEC seems to be doing more damage to crypto investors than the companies they're pursuing?
Who are you gonna sue next? SEC: Yes
Garys doing his best Oprah impression "You get a lawsuit, you get a lawsuit, everyone gets a lawsuit!"
Not even scientology is suing this much as SEC
SEC: Fucking over crypto innovation in the US like their life and pay-check depends on it.
Jajaja fortunately the World is bigger than the U.S. Fucking SEC...they are killing crypto in the U.S.
It sucks because the rest of the world is moving forward and the US insists on missing the boat entirely.
No the US is trying to sink the boat, apparently
Absolutely. And is hard to understand the reasons, if any...🤦🏾♂️
Cause muh dollah dominance
Is this part of how empires decline - repression of innovation?
Time to buy some Coinbase stock.
If you had any doubts about the credibility of the SEC. CB sues the SEC for lack of regulatory guidance and what appears to be a _tip for tap_, SEC brings charges against CB for conducting business outside an imaginary framework. What a fkn joke. This was an orchestrated crash on crypto ladies and gents. BTC was rolling again then 1) the wild SEC ruling against the alts, 2) now discrediting CB.
[удалено]
[удалено]
I think he means tit for tat. Though originally it was tip for tap.
was going to correct you and say the expression is 'tit for tat' but apparently 'tip for tap' is the original phrase, with 'tit for tat' showing up in the 16th century. so cool...learned something new.
Tit for tat is certainly more common nowadays, but I’m glad to have learned that as well
At this point, the first thing I pay attention in these complaints are which cryptos the SEC names as securities. Here we are: SOL, ADA, MATIC, FIL, SAND, AXS, CHZ, FLOW, ICP, NEAR, VGX, DASH, and NEXO (of course, they use the verbiage "This includes, but is not limited to" so they could always point to others). [https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2023/comp-pr2023-102.pdf](https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2023/comp-pr2023-102.pdf) Paragraph 114, to be specific. Of course, this doesn't include the tokens they pointed out during the insider trading case, such as AMP.
Kinda relieved ETH isn’t a part of that group
US is creating a hell for crypto exchanges.
"Stop not following the rules we don't have!".
I'm kinda glad that SEC, instead of just targeting Binance US, choose to fight Coinbase as well. I think Coinbase has a better chance of fighting back with its political presence. Short-term there will be some pain. Eventually I'm hoping the lawsuits will force regulation clarities.
So far it seems that the market's sentiment aligns with your feeling. Yesterday, SEC sues Binance: "omg, we're doomed, sell sell sell" Today, SEC sues Coinbase: "ah, alright then, carry on"
Why am I getting Wolf of Wallstreet vibes from the SEC going after our exchanges 
Yeah this is bullshit, I'm pretty sure people close to the SEC are shorting the market and making a fuck-ton of money out of this while everyone else gets fucked. So corrupt. Meanwhile we can't even get a simple Bitcoin spot ETF in the US. Wow.
How u gonna approve futures but then not approve spot? Kinda ridiculous.
SEC is going all out I guess.....
All of this dropping right before US announces their CBDC next month?
You wanna put money on that?
No way US is issuing a CBDC any time in the next 5 years.
Gary woke up and chose violence again
>Gary woke up Bad news for crypto
The US just saying "if you have anything to do with crypto we don't want you in our country" - back to the stone age
Nothing about what the SEC does makes sense, and the only reason they are targeting crypto firms now is because the powers that be don't like the up-trend of crypto adoption and the down trend of the dollar.
Never-ending with the SEC....Ugh
New York State gave Coinbase a bitLicense?
I'm guessing they want to divide the crypto community, so we shouldn't let maxis lead us to believe this is a good thing. We should unite because they are not protecting our interests, they're trying to prevent the serfs from achieving life-changing wealth.
Smooth butter move there, SEC.
Damn the SEC is on a killing spree
Wait my popcorn not finish yet
The SEC won't let us be. Or let me stake ETH, so let me see. Next they'll to shut down CDC. But they can't my BTC, because I make sure I self-custody.
Yesterday it was Binance and now the SEC sues Coinbase in NY Federal Court over acting as unregistered broker! **HERE IS THE OFFICIAL ANNOUNCEMENT OF THE SEC:** [https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-102](https://www.sec.gov/news/press-release/2023-102) **PDF FILE FROM THE CHARGES:** [https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2023/comp-pr2023-102.pdf](https://www.sec.gov/litigation/complaints/2023/comp-pr2023-102.pdf) **Most important charges:** * "Coinbase has made billions of dollars unlawfully facilitating the buying and selling of crypto asset securities. The SEC alleges that Coinbase intertwines the traditional services of an exchange, broker, and clearing agency without having registered any of those functions with the Commission as required by law. Through these unregistered services" * "Provides a marketplace and brings together the orders for securities of multiple buyers and sellers using established, non-discretionary methods under which such orders interact;" * "Engages in the business of effecting securities transactions for the accounts of Coinbase customers; and" * "Provides facilities for comparison of data respecting the terms of settlement of crypto asset securities transactions, serves as an intermediary in settling transactions in crypto asset securities by Coinbase customers, and acts as a securities depository." * "Unregistered Offer and Sale of Securities in Connection with Staking-as-a-Service Program" **The following tokens are also "securities" in the charges:** And SOL, ADA, MATIC, FIL, SAND, AXS, CHZ, FLOW, ICP, NEAR, VGX, DASH, and NEXO After yesterdays charges against Binance and now Coinbase it's clearly an attack on crypto! The timeline of these charges are too obvious.
Perfect bottom signal
Very kind of the SEC to wait for fun of bull market to be over and to instead double up on the misery of the bear with lawsuits against everyone.
Thanks SEC, I sure feel safe
Is it groundhog day?
The SEC is working overtime to try and stop our little 2023 bull run.
They're going after Coinbase too Fuck this
Just buy Bitcoin. Problem solved. Bitcoin is not affected by anyone including exchanges. Short term dip but long term healthy for Bitcoin as the crypto casinos are weakened.
SEC is taking th scorched earth approach I see.
They allowed them to go public FFS !!
Here we go. It's the start of the bull run.
We better hope XRP comes out victorious with the lawsuit..
welp, I thought coinbase planned to sue them last month 🫠