Autor Cointelegraph By Kirill Bryanov

Law Decoded: Russia flounders, America competes, IMF keeps fuming, Jan. 24–31

One of the most fascinating implications of the collision between traditional political institutions and the crypto space is how it can reveal the glaring lack of cohesion within power systems that otherwise look monolithic. Digital assets reside in a parallel policy dimension where neither a centralized consensus nor a clear rulebook exists, leading to a surprising variety of voices and opinions emerging in the absence of a politically coordinated course. Last week, a rare lively policy debate broke out in Russia in the aftermath of its central bank’s attempt to promote a hardline stance on crypto. One does not often see such a public interagency disagreement on substantive issues.Below is the concise version of the latest “Law Decoded” newsletter. For the full breakdown of policy developments over the last week, register for the full newsletter below.Russia: Competing visions clashFollowing the central bank’s blanket ban proposal, it emergedthat the Ministry of Finance had been working on its own crypto regulatory framework all along, whose tenets are fundamentally opposed to the Central Bank of Russia’s prohibitive drive. In all, the ministry proposes using the traditional banking system’s rails to facilitate crypto payments all the while categorizing investors as qualified or unqualified and introducing strong financial surveillance mechanisms. Even former President and Prime Minister Dmitry Medvedev came out of the woodwork to offer comments in support of regulation, rather than a blanket ban on cryptocurrency operations.Apparently, the narrative battle over how to deal with the power of the digital asset space is underway within the halls of the Russian government, and its ultimate outcome is anyone’s guess.Tagging along with omnibus billsFirst tested with the inclusion of the problematic digital asset broker definition into the infrastructure bill last year, the tactic of stealthily appending crypto-hostile provisions to gigantic must-pass bills could be crypto opponents’ new weapon of choice. Having examined almost 3,000 pages of the recently introduced America COMPETES Act, crypto advocates found a clause that could empower the Treasury Department to bypass existing checks and the logic of due process to order “special measures” against certain financial transactions, including those executed using cryptocurrency. Such measures could include imposing surveillance or outright prohibition to financial institutions to offer certain services or products.Spot BTC ETF shall not passThe U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s principled stance against exchange-traded funds that offer direct exposure to cryptocurrencies is well-known, so its rejection of yet another spot ETF last week is not a shocker for anyone who follows this space. Neither is the extension of the review period of another BTC-related product, ARK 21Shares Bitcoin ETF: Pushing such deadlines as far back as the existing rules allow is the regulator’s preferred strategy.Some analysts, however, begin to see this pattern as part of the executive branch’s broader crypto regulatory strategy rather than a single agency’s policy. Bloomberg senior ETF analyst Eric Balchunas opined on Twitter that the SEC’s stance on spot Bitcoin ETF jibes well with the rumors of the Biden administration’s upcoming executive order that would cast cryptocurrencies as a national security threat.

Čítaj viac

Averted a year ago, controversial transaction monitoring rule is back on Treasury’s radar

As the Department of the Treasury has announced its regulatory agenda for the fiscal year on Jan. 31, many in the Web3 space have likely experienced flashbacks to December 2020, when the agency had first proposed to impose Know Your Customer, or KYC, rules on transactions that involved self-custodied crypto wallets.The Treasury’s semiannual agenda and regulatory plan, a document that is meant to inform the public of the department’s ongoing rulemaking activities and encourages public feedback, features a clause entitled “Requirements for certain transactions involving convertible virtual currency or digital assets.”Ascribed to the Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, or FinCEN, it proposes to require banks and money service businesses to “submit reports, keep records and verify the identity of customers” in relation to transactions with funds held in unhosted wallets.In FinCEN parlance, unhosted (also known as self-hosted) wallets are those that are not controlled by an intermediary financial institution or service. Users of such wallets “interact with a virtual currency system directly and have independent control over the transmission of the value.”The rule proposed in December 2020 would have required registered cryptocurrency exchanges to collect personal details of their customers transacting with an unhosted wallet if the value of the transaction exceeded $3,000. A person sending funds from an exchange account to their private wallet would fall within the scope of the rule.Introduced in the waning days of Secretary of the Treasury Steven Mnuchin’s tenure, the rule was scrapped amid massive pushback from the industry.At the time, Mnuchin said that the rule addressed “substantial national security concerns” associated with the cryptocurrency market. The resurgence of the agency’s focus on the self-hosted wallets measure could have to do with the “crypto as a national security threat” focus of the executive order that the Biden administration is reportedly preparing.Still, mentioning a rule on the Treasury’s semiannual agenda does not mean that it will necessarily be adopted.

Čítaj viac

U.S. Congressman wants to scrub bill provision that crypto advocates say is a potential disaster

North Carolina Representative Ted Budd submitted an amendment to the omnibus America COMPETES Act of 2022, specifically targeting the provision that would allow the Treasury Department to impose “special measures,” including surveillance and outright prohibitions, against “certain transmittals of funds.”As Cointelegraph reported, executives of crypto advocacy group Coin Center had earlier turned the spotlight on the provision, introduced by Connecticut Representative Jim Himes, that would scrap the existing checks — such as the requirement of public consultation and time limits on special measures orders — constraining the Treasury’s power to unilaterally prohibit financial transactions. If passed in its current form, the provision would deal a major blow not only to the cryptocurrency industry but to “privacy and due process generally,” as Coin Center’s executive director Jerry Brito stated.Republican Congressman Ted Budd echoed this argument in a statement that read:”The Treasury Department should not have unilateral authority to make sweeping economic decisions without providing full due process of rulemaking. This draconian provision would not help America compete with China, it would employ China’s heavy-handed playbook to snuff out financial innovation in our own country.”In a tweet that followed, Budd called the provision in question a “massive mistake.”Tucking new rules that could adversely affect the crypto industry into huge, “must-pass” pieces of legislation is a practice that first came into the spotlight last year with the appending, without public discussion, of a highly contentious definition of a “digital asset broker” to the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act later signed into law.The primary focus of the 2,912-page America COMPETES Act of 2022 is on remedying supply chain issues to keep the manufacturing and technology sectors of the United States internationally competitive. However, the sprawling bill also includes a host of seemingly unrelated measures and spending authorizations, including a ban on shark fin sales, steps against harassment in science and new liabilities for online marketplaces.

Čítaj viac

Clampdown on crypto ads: A one-off or a new phase of global regulation?

Over the last week, regulators in three major jurisdictions across two continents introduced new rules governing cryptocurrency-related promotions and advertisements. Citing consumer risks associated with digital asset investments, authorities in the United Kingdom, Singapore and Spain tightened the requirements around crypto firms’ marketing messaging and customer recruitment practices. While some experts view this emerging trend as a sign of a new global phase of cryptocurrency regulation, questions about the efficiency and universal applicability of this approach persist.New measuresIn the United Kingdom, Her Majesty’s Treasury issued a report summarizing the results of a public consultation on crypto-asset promotions, published in July 2020, as well as the government’s further steps in bringing such promotions within the regulatory perimeter. The key takeaway here is that crypto-related marketing messages are to be included in the scope of the Financial Promotion Order, meaning that the same rules will apply to them as those governing promotions of traditional financial products.The National Securities Market Commission, Spain’s chief securities regulator, announced a new set of requirements that will apply to digital asset firms targeting 100,000 people or more with their ads, as well as those relying on social media influencers to promote their products and services.In both the U.K. and Spain, regulators will require crypto promotions to abide by the principles of clarity and fairness while also prominently featuring risk disclosures. Ads’ sponsors will also have to either seek pre-approval (U.K.) or notify the authorities (Spain) of the upcoming campaigns.The guidelines issued by the Monetary Authority of Singapore feature even more severe limitations. Essentially, the regulator will allow digital asset service providers to advertise solely on their own platforms, while physical ads in public spaces or using third parties such as social media influencers are entirely off limits.Drivers of the new approachUp until recently, regulators largely afforded crypto firms a wide latitude as far as promotional activity was concerned. If anything, it was big tech firms that experimented with censoring crypto-related ads on their platforms. Now, financial regulators are moving into the front seat.Nathan Catania, partner at digital asset firm XReg Consulting, sees this development as a sign of a shifting regulatory landscape. Catania commented to Cointelegraph:Jurisdictions that have ironed out AML/CFT regimes are now looking at other prominent crypto risks and it is clear that consumer protection is high on the agenda. Many large crypto players have been ramping up advertising campaigns in the last year or so and this is drawing the attention of policymakers and regulators who will want to ensure that these adverts are not misleading consumers.In an XReg’s report on the topic, Catania and his colleagues further argue that the crypto industry players “can expect regulatory authorities in other countries to follow suit in the coming months,” noting that the wave of restrictions on crypto promotions can represent the “second phase of crypto asset regulation,” focused on consumer protection.Indeed, one way to look at the intensifying regulatory attention to digital asset promotions is that there exists a logical sequence of measures to which governments assign varying levels of priority. Another interpretation seems feasible as well, whereby authorities simply react to an emerging reality, regardless of whether they consider the more fundamental regulatory boxes successfully checked.Naturally, the growth and mainstreaming of the digital asset space in recent years resulted in crypto businesses expanding their outreach to audiences far beyond the original core of the movement. While the exact numbers are difficult to pin down, it is clear that in the past year the volume of crypto ads across many countries and platforms — from Indian TV to London’s public transport — has massively increased.In the light of these dynamics, as regulators’ thinking goes, it is likely that people with insufficient understanding of crypto as an asset class will get exposed to bad-faith promotional messages. Some of them could then be tempted to invest or otherwise participate in digital finance without being fully aware of the risks.A global trend?Reliable data on the effects of the new restrictions on crypto promotions is unlikely to appear anytime soon, and at this point it is impossible to tell whether it will have major effects on people’s financial wellbeing or crypto companies’ bottom line.Changpeng Zhao, CEO of crypto exchange Binance CEO, opined that the growing trend will not affect the demand for digital asset products because word of mouth is the primary marketing tool in this space.It is also not warranted that the regulatory concern for cryptocurrency promotions will be equally distributed geographically. For one, in the United States, there are currently few signs of crypto ads being in government watchdogs’ crosshairs.Raul Garcia, financial services principal at Florida-based accounting services firm Kaufman Rossin, noted to Cointelegraph that in the United States, regulatory focus is on taxation and investor protection, whereas promotional messages remain outside of the scope of the authorities’ attention. Garcia commented:Everywhere you look in the U.S. there’s something about crypto, they’re advertising […] And I really don’t see any strong resistance, any limit to crypto promotion or anything like that. Too much money to be made!The difference between the jurisdictions ramping up cryptocurrency ads oversight and the U.S. can be attributed to the heightened focus on consumer protection characteristic of many European nations and Singapore versus the American free-market focus. All other regulatory considerations held equal, more relaxed rules for digital asset promotions could make the U.S. a more attractive destination for crypto companies in the future.

Čítaj viac

U.S. Congressman calls for ‘Broad, bipartisan consensus’ on important issues of digital asset policy

In a letter to the leadership of the United States House Financial Services Committee, ranking member Patrick McHenry took a jab at “inconsistent treatment and jurisdictional uncertainty” inherent in U.S. crypto regulation and called for the Committee to take on its critical issues.McHenry, a Republican representing North Carolina, opened by mentioning that the Committee’s Democrat Chairwoman Maxine Waters is looking to schedule additional hearings addressing matters pertinent to the digital asset industry. He further stressed the need for identifying and prioritizing the key issues and achieving a “broad, bipartisan consensus” on the matters affecting the industry that holds immense promise for the financial system and broader economy.Citing the confusion that the industry faces due to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) competing claims for jurisdiction over digital assets, McHenry noted that neither of their positions is grounded in statute. Congress, he maintained, should not hand digital asset regulation over to regulatory agencies or courts, but rather step in to categorize the new asset class and lay down the rules governing it.Furthermore, Congressman McHenry suggested that the Financial Services Committee take a close look at the stablecoin report drafted by the President’s Working Group on Financial Markets (PWG) and examine the Federal Reserve’s position and future steps with regard to a U.S. central bank digital currency (CBDC).In December last year, the U.S. House Financial Services Committee hosted a crypto-focused hearing that featured a strong lineup of industry executives and was widely lauded as a massively productive exchange between policymakers and digital asset stakeholders.

Čítaj viac

Získaj BONUS 8 € v Bitcoinoch

nakup bitcoin z karty

Registrácia Binance

Burza Binance

Aktuálne kurzy