Autor Cointelegraph By Derek Andersen

Crypto industry seeks to educate, influence US lawmakers as it faces increasing regulation

Interaction between the cryptocurrency industry and Capitol Hill is becoming ever more intensive as efforts to regulate crypto grow in tandem with its popularity. The surge in crypto industry lobbying last year was given some concrete parameters in February by crypto analytics startup Crypto Head. It released a report showing that the crypto companies that spent the most money on lobbying in 2021 were Robinhood, Ripple Labs, Coinbase and the Blockchain Association. These organizations were the lobbying leaders during the past five years as well, although with different rankings.Here is what the United States crypto-lobbying landscape looks like today.Metrics of influenceRobinhood spent $1.35 million on lobbying in 2021 and was the only crypto-related organization to spend more than $1 million. Ripple Labs, in second place, spent $900,000. The Economist estimated a total of $5 million was spent by crypto firms on lobbying in the first three quarters of 2021. To put this in perspective, the highest-spending lobbying group in the U.S. in 2020, the National Association of Realtors, spent $84.11 million according to the nonprofit Open Secrets, which provided the data for the Crypto Head report. Blockchain Association executive director Kristin Smith said in an email to Cointelegraph that “Spending is only one metric of influence, and these roundups do not often provide context on the effectiveness of dollars spent.” Smith noted the Crypto Head report “mixes companies with different focuses, multi-member trade associations and other entities, making a one-to-one comparison difficult.”Smith said education is the top priority of her organization. She told Fox News last year, “Our number-one priority is helping [Treasury Secretary Janet] Yellen understand crypto goes beyond the financing of criminal enterprises.”The crypto industry was not alone in lobbying for cryptocurrency. The National Football League spent $600,000 lobbying Congress, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission and other government agencies in 2021 with the goal of determining “whether crypto can be an integral part of the League’s business,” according to CNBC sources. In February, former presidential candidate Andrew Yang launched Lobby3, a decentralized autonomous organization that will lobby for Web3 and the eradication of poverty. Revolvers at workCrypto Head noted the presence of “revolvers” in the ranks of cryptocurrency industry lobbyists, defining revolvers as “government regulators, congressional staff or members of Congress who take jobs in lobbying firms, making the most of their insider knowledge.” The narrative became richer in February with the release of the Tech Transparency Project (TTP) report “Crypto Industry Amasses Washington Insiders as Lobbying Blitz Intensifies.”The TTP report documents the presence of “two former chairs of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), two former chairs of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and one former chairman of the Senate Finance Committee,” other former legislators and staffers of various sorts for a total of “nearly 240 examples of officials with key positions in the White House, Congress, federal regulatory agencies, and national political campaigns moving to and from the industry.”While the employment of revolvers is common practice in many industries, and not only for lobbying, TTP saw a potential conflict of interest in movement from the industry into government. Specifically, five “former top executives at Circle Internet Financial,” operator of the stablecoin USD Coin (USDC), have joined the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston “even as the firm is seeking a bank charter from the Fed.” The Boston Fed is also taking part in the Project Hamilton research on a digital dollar.Crypto PACsPolitical action committees (PACs) give the crypto industry another opportunity to influence the political process, and there has been a flurry of organizations on that front as well. The American Blockchain PAC was founded in November with the goal of raising $300 million for pro-crypto candidates. However, it was reported in mid-February to have raised less than $8,000 so far. In January, the $10-million Democratic Protect Our Future PAC was created, and donors include FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried. The Gonna Make It (GMI) PAC launched the same month with backing from former Donald Trump communications director Anthony Scaramucci, with a tweet declaring, “When we organize, when we mobilize, we are unstoppable. We are GMI PAC, a super PAC that will elect pro-crypto candidates in federal races across the country.” It intends to raise $20 million.Coinbase launched its second attempt at a PAC in February. It was a founding member of the Crypto Council for Innovation last April. Crypto politics in the U.S. promises to be interesting this year.

Čítaj viac

Dogecoin Foundation registers name and logos as trademarked within in the EU

The Dogecoin Foundation announced on Twitter on Wednesday that it had registered “Doge,” “Dogecoin” and its associated logos as trademarks in the European Union. The certificate displayed in the tweet was dated Jan. 13, 2022.Foundation executive board member Jens Wiechers said in the tweet thread, “The issue isn’t (and has never been) use in memes, etc, but attempts by people completely unaffiliated with Dogecoin to register them, which only really makes sense if they want to then extort either the community or the Dogecoin project, devs, foundation, etc. directly.”Much success.It’s a small victory that seems so very irrelevant given all that’s currently happening in the world, but it’s an important step.Thank you @DACBeachcroft (& for this: @PageWhite_IP Germany), as well as @MosesSingerLLP for their representation in the USA. ♥️ 1/ pic.twitter.com/nufaJLUSFG— Dogecoin Foundation (@DogecoinFdn) March 2, 2022Since its revival in August, the Dogecoin Foundation has faced numerous issues with the use of its name and imagery due to the fact that the foundation did not seek trademark protection at the time of its creation in 2014. In the United States, as of September, the foundation’s application at the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office was competing with “half a dozen” others, and “at least 100” cryptocurrencies not related to the Dogecoin Foundation were using the Dogecoin name. Another apparent consequence of the scramble over the cryptocurrency’s name has been the resignation of foundation director Ross Nicoll. Announcing his decision in his blog on Feb. 16, Nicoll wrote that the foundation “is operating in an extremely challenging environment” where “the stress involved is overwhelming.”According to Nicoll, “a number of parties were registering trademarks for Dogecoin,” and “in the summer of 2021, there was a potential lawsuit against the developers from someone who claimed we were responsible for their funds.”Nicoll also mentioned a possible conflict of interest with his day job as a software developer at Alphabet. He remains at the foundation as an adviser. The Dogecoin Foundation, in its announcement of Nicoll’s move, said Nicoll told core members of his plans almost a year ago, and “has been instrumental in the re-establishment of the Dogecoin Foundation” with his departure in mind.

Čítaj viac

Happy to be regulated? Fallout from BlockFi settlement is a matter of speculation

It might seem unlikely that BlockFi founder and CEO Zac Prince would describe a prosecution that resulted in a $100-million fine for his company as “a win not only for BlockFi but for the broader cryptocurrency industry,” but that is indeed what he said. And, he might be right, although it remains to be seen for now. The settlementFounded in 2017, BlockFi is a New Jersey-based crypto financial institution with a team of 850 and one million clients worldwide. Its popular BlockFi Interest Account product, with half a million users, including 407,000 in the United States, was the object of a cease and desist order from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and 32 state attorneys general on July 20, 2021. A statement at that time by the NJ Attorney General’s Office alleged that BlockFi was “selling unregistered securities in the form of interest-earning cryptocurrency accounts that have raised at least $14.7 billion worldwide.” On Feb. 14, the SEC announced that it had charged BlockFi with “failing to register the offers and sales of its retail crypto lending product.” BlockFi was also charged with misleading investors by stating that its institutional loans were “typically” over-collateralized when, in fact, no more than 24% of the loans ever were. In the order instituting proceedings, it is noted that this is “an operational oversight” that happened after it became clear that large financial institutions were simply unwilling to overcollateralize their loans. Finally, a settlement was reached under which BlockFi agreed to pay a $50 million penalty to the SEC and another $50 million to the 32 states without admitting wrongdoing or liability. In addition, BlockFi would “attempt to bring its business within the provisions of the Investment Company Act within 60 days.” In the meantime, U.S. clients cannot add funds to their BlockFi Interest Accounts and new accounts cannot be opened in the U.S. or by U.S. persons. The company said it would create a new SEC-compliant lending product, BlockFi Yield, and BlockFi Interest Accounts will be converted to the new product. First past the postThere is BlockFi’s win: It will be regulated. Troutman Pepper partner Stephen Piepgrass, whose areas of focus include state attorneys general, called the progression of events “the natural evolution of any business.” “First they operate in a gray regulatory space, then those who can comply come into the light,” Piepgrass told Cointelegraph. By being the first to reach regulation, BlockFi can “help negotiate new conditions” to its advantage.Piepgrass assures that there is more still going on behind the scenes with efforts by the SEC and state attorneys general to regulate crypto lending. Some activity has already been seen. Coinbase was dissuaded from opening its Coinbase Lend product by the threat of an SEC lawsuit last year. Celsius, Gemini and Voyager Digital are known to be under SEC review. “Crypto lending platforms offering securities like BlockFi’s [Interest Accounts] should take immediate notice of today’s resolution and come into compliance with the federal securities laws,” Gurbir S. Grewal, director of the SEC’s Division of Enforcement and former New Jersey attorney general, said in the announcement of the settlement. “Adherence to our registration and disclosure requirements is critical to providing investors with the information and transparency they need to make well-informed investment decisions in the crypto asset space.” Rocky path to complianceNot everyone agrees that this is an unalloyed win for the cryptocurrency industry or for cryptocurrency users. SEC commissioner Hester Peirce, in a dissenting statement on the BlockFi settlement, pointed out potential outcomes that would be somewhat less than victorious. “Rather than forcing transparency around retail crypto lending products,” she wrote, “today’s settlement may stop them from being offered to retail customers in the United States.” Peirce also noted the complexity of meeting the provisions of the Investment Company Act and called the proposed 60-day timeframe, even with a 30-day extension, “extremely ambitious.” She could have added that there is no guarantee that the new BlockFi Yield product will be approved. Philip Moustakis, former SEC Division of Enforcement senior counsel and currently counsel at Seward & Kissell, called the BlockFi prosecution “a shot across the bow of crypto lending platforms.” The case is important, he said, as BlockFi is the first “sizable, significant” crypto lender to be prosecuted. Moustakis told Cointelegraph he would have liked to see a “more explicit pathway to compliance.” Without “a broad-based enforcement action […] with concrete carrots and sticks,” he said, the SEC may be forced to investigate crypto lending platforms individually. For the SEC, Moustakis said, the BlockFi case represents “the next level of difficulty” in its ongoing push to regulate cryptocurrency. The $100-million fine is being hailed as the largest ever paid by a cryptocurrency company. It will take some time to see the full impact of the SEC’s prosecution of BlockFi. But, the repercussions have already started. Nexo reportedly stopped paying interest to U.S. users of its Earn Interest product on Feb. 18. The company said its Earn Interest product “in its current form will not be available for new clients, until the restructuring of the Earn Interest Product and the registration process with the relevant regulatory bodies are finalized, as per the recently received guidance.”

Čítaj viac

MIT, Boston Fed give digital dollar CBDC a modest test run

The world recently got a sneak peek at what a digital dollar, or at least one component of a hypothetical United States central bank digital currency (CBDC), might look like, courtesy of Project Hamilton, a collaborative effort of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and the MIT Digital Currency Initiative. The results of the project’s first phase were originally expected last summer but were released on Feb. 3. The project, announced in 2020, is named in honor of Alexander Hamilton, the first U.S. Treasury secretary, and Margaret Hamilton, an MIT staffer who contributed to NASA’s Apollo program.Researchers developed two open-source models of transaction processing software, called OpenCBDC, for the “technology-agnostic” project. The researchers note in the project’s white paper that “technical and policy choices are highly interdependent and that these choices are more granular and with more permutations than commonly discussed.” Only one of the models used distributed ledger technology, and it turned out to be the less satisfactory solution, with the technology described as “not needed.” The distributed ledger model was “not a good match” for the project due to its performance. The project assumed administration by a central actor, and the model was modified accordingly. However, it created performance bottlenecks, and the requirement that the central transaction processor maintain transaction history slowed throughput significantly. The alternative model’s two-phase commit architecture supported “a range of potential privacy options” without central storage of transaction history, although the researchers acknowledged that it presented greater challenges for auditing.The distributed ledger model had a peak throughput of approximately 170,000 transactions per second, while the competing model, which processed transactions in parallel on multiple computers, had a throughput of 1.7 million transactions per second and showed linear scalability with the addition of more servers.The second, and apparently last, phase of Project Hamilton will “determine technical and performance tradeoffs associated with various designs.” Researchers have promised to look at “privacy, auditability, programmability, interoperability, and more.” Boston Fed Executive Vice President Jim Cunha said in a press call that “We’ll be defining a number of use cases that focus on different design and possibly policy questions,” adding: “For example, if one policy goal was to maximize privacy, and the other is to stop criminal activity, those create conflicts from a technology perspective in how you design the system.”The release of the Hamilton Project Phase 1 results comes simultaneously with China’s attempt to scale up its rollout of the digital yuan at the Winter Olympics. The contrast between the United States’ and China’s level of CBDC development could not be starker, and those behind Project Hamilton took pains not to overstate the project’s place in American CBDC development. MIT Digital Currency Initiative director Neha Narula said in a statement, “It is important to note that this project is not a comment on whether or not the U.S. should issue a CBDC — but work like this is vital to help determine the answer to that question.” She added, “The policy conversation around central bank digital currency is still in its infancy.” The scattershot nature of that conversation is apparent at a glance. The Fed steadfastly refuses to take a stance on a CBDC, reiterating its neutral position in a paper released last month. The same week, Representative Tom Emmer, a Republican from Minnesota, introduced a bill to prohibit the Fed from issuing a retail CBDC, claiming such a law would keep the Fed off an “insidious path” toward authoritarianism. Not long afterward, Bank of America issued a note calling a CBDC “inevitable.” The Fed is welcoming comments on Project Hamilton via an online form with 22 questions. The project is also hiring a new product management director.

Čítaj viac

Získaj BONUS 8 € v Bitcoinoch

nakup bitcoin z karty

Registrácia Binance

Burza Binance

Aktuálne kurzy