Gary Gensler Crypto Perspective: Why Bitcoin is Not a Security, but Refuses to Say It’s a Commodity?

Gary Gensler Crypto Perspective: Why Bitcoin is Not a Security, but Refuses to Say It’s a Commodity?

The chairman of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Gary Gensler, has been making headlines in the crypto space with his statements on the regulatory status of various digital assets.He has repeatedly affirmed that Bitcoin is a commodity, but has been reluctant to say the same for other cryptocurrencies, especially those that have been issued through initial coin offerings (ICOs) or have some form of governance mechanismHe has also expressed concerns about stablecoins and their potential impact on the financial system. What are his intentions behind these statements? Is he trying to protect investors, stifle innovation, or something else?

I will try to analyze Gensler’s views and motives from an opinionated perspective, based on his public speeches, interviews, and testimonies. I will also discuss the implications of his stance for the crypto industry and the investors.

Gensler’s Background and Philosophy

Before becoming the SEC chair, Gensler had a long and distinguished career in both the public and private sectors. He was a partner at Goldman Sachs for 18 years, where he held various leadership positions in trading, finance, and technology. He also served as the undersecretary of the Treasury for domestic finance and the assistant secretary of the Treasury for financial markets under President Bill Clinton. President Barack Obama later appointed him as the chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), where he oversaw the implementation of the Dodd-Frank Act and the regulation of the derivatives markets after the 2008 financial crisis.

Gensler is also an academic and an educator. He is a professor of the practice of global economics and management at the MIT Sloan School of Management, where he teaches courses on blockchain technology, digital currencies, financial innovation, and public policy. He is also a senior advisor to the MIT Media Lab’s Digital Currency Initiative.

Some observers have described him as a “crypto-friendly” regulator, given his expertise and interest in the field. He has acknowledged the potential benefits of blockchain technology and digital assets for innovation, efficiency, inclusion, and competition. He has also praised Bitcoin as a “catalyst for change” and a “scarce store of value” that is not controlled by any government or central authority.

However, he is also a “crypto-savvy” regulator who understands the risks and challenges posed by the nascent industry. He has emphasized the need for investor protection, market integrity, financial stability, and national security in the crypto space. He has also warned about the prevalence of fraud, manipulation, hacking, money laundering, tax evasion, and terrorist financing in the crypto ecosystem.

In my personal opinion, Gensler’s philosophy seems to be based on two main principles: first, that every financial product or service should be subject to some form of regulation or oversight; and second, that the existing laws and rules should be applied consistently and fairly to all market participants.

Gensler’s Stance on Bitcoin

Gensler’s stance on Bitcoin is relatively straightforward and consistent. He has repeatedly stated that Bitcoin is not a security under the federal securities laws, but rather a commodity under the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA). This means that Bitcoin falls under the jurisdiction of the CFTC, not the SEC.

This classification is based on the Supreme Court’s Howey test , which determines whether an asset is a security or not based on whether it involves an investment of money in a common enterprise with an expectation of profit derived from the efforts of others. Bitcoin does not meet this criteria because it does not have any issuer or promoter who controls its supply or value. It is also decentralized and distributed among its users who validate transactions and secure the network through proof-of-work mining.

His view aligns with his predecessors at the SEC and the CFTC, who have also recognized Bitcoin as a commodity. It also reflects the reality of how Bitcoin operates and functions in the market. This does not mean that Bitcoin is free from any regulation or oversight. As a commodity, Bitcoin is subject to anti-fraud and anti-manipulation provisions under the CEA and the securities laws. It is also subject to reporting and recordkeeping requirements under the Bank Secrecy Act and the Patriot Act. Moreover, Bitcoin derivatives, such as futures and options, are regulated by the CFTC as commodity contracts. And Bitcoin exchanges, platforms, wallets, and custodians are regulated by various state and federal agencies as money transmitters, broker-dealers, or investment advisers.

Gensler’s intention behind his stance on Bitcoin seems to be to acknowledge its unique nature and innovation, while ensuring that it is subject to appropriate rules and standards that protect investors and the public interest.

Gensler’s Stance on Other Cryptocurrencies

Next, his stance on other cryptocurrencies. It is less clear and more nuanced. He has indicated that many of them should be considered securities under the federal securities laws, but he has not specified which ones or how to determine their status. He has also suggested that some may be commodities or hybrid instruments that fall under the SEC and the CFTC’s purview.

Gensler’s position is based on his interpretation of the Howey test , which he believes applies to most of the crypto tokens that have been issued through ICOs or have some form of governance mechanism. He argues that these tokens involve an investment of money in a common enterprise with an expectation of profit derived from the efforts of others, such as the network’s developers, promoters, or validators.

His view is consistent with that of the SEC staff, who have issued several guidance documents and enforcement actions against various crypto projects that they deemed to be securities offerings without proper registration or exemption. It is also supported by some federal courts that have applied the Howey test to crypto tokens in civil and criminal cases .

However, his angle is not universally accepted or applied. Some crypto projects have challenged the SEC’s authority or interpretation in court or through administrative proceedings. Some have also sought clarity or relief from the SEC through no-action letters or safe harbor proposals. Some have also argued that their tokens are not securities but rather commodities, currencies, utility tokens, or network tokens that serve a different purpose or function than investment contracts .

His intention behind his stance on other cryptocurrencies seems to be to assert the SEC’s jurisdiction and mandate over a large segment of the crypto industry that he believes poses significant risks to investors and the market. He also seems to be seeking more cooperation and coordination from the crypto industry to comply with the existing laws and rules or seek appropriate exemptions or waivers.

Gensler’s Stance on Stablecoins

Gensler’s stance on stablecoins is also unclear and complex. He has expressed concerns about stablecoins and their potential impact on the financial system, but he has not proposed any specific regulatory framework or approach for them. He has also indicated that some stablecoins may be securities, while others may be commodities or hybrid instruments that fall under both the SEC and the CFTC’s jurisdiction.

Stablecoins are digital assets that are designed to maintain a stable value relative to another asset, such as a fiat currency, a commodity, or a basket of assets. They are often used as a medium of exchange, a store of value, or a unit of account in the crypto space. They are also used as a bridge between different blockchains or platforms. There are different types of stablecoins, such as fiat-backed, crypto-backed, algorithmic, or hybrid.

Gensler’s position is based on his assessment of the risks and challenges posed by stablecoins to the financial system. He has highlighted the issues of transparency, accountability, governance, liquidity, solvency, market integrity, consumer protection, and systemic stability that arise from stablecoins. He has also warned about the potential for stablecoins to facilitate illicit activities, such as money laundering, tax evasion, and terrorist financing.

His perspective is shared by other regulators and policymakers who have also expressed concerns about stablecoins and their implications for the financial system. The Financial Stability Board (FSB), an international body that monitors and makes recommendations about the global financial system, has issued a report on stablecoins that outlines 10 high-level recommendations for their regulation and oversight. The President’s Working Group on Financial Markets (PWG), a group of senior U.S. officials that advises the president on financial matters, has also issued a statement on stablecoins that calls for a comprehensive regulatory framework for them.

However, Gensler’s view is not yet translated into any concrete action or proposal. He has stated that he is working with his fellow regulators at the CFTC, the Federal Reserve, the Treasury Department, and other agencies to address the issues raised by stablecoins. He has also stated that he is open to engaging with Congress and the industry to develop a clear and consistent regulatory regime for stablecoins.

Gensler’s Implications for the Crypto Industry and the Investors

Gensler’s stance on Bitcoin, other cryptocurrencies, and stablecoins has significant implications for the crypto industry and the investors. Depending on how he implements his vision and how the industry responds, his stance could have positive or negative effects on the innovation, growth, and adoption of the crypto space.

On the positive side, Gensler’s stance could provide more clarity, certainty, and legitimacy for the crypto industry and the investors. By applying the existing laws and rules to the crypto space, Gensler could create a level playing field for all market participants and foster fair competition and cooperation. By enforcing compliance and accountability it could enhance investor protection and market integrity and reduce fraud and manipulation. By engaging with Congress and the industry, he could further develop a comprehensive and consistent regulatory framework for the crypto space that balances innovation and regulation.

On the negative side, Gensler’s stance could also pose more challenges, costs, and barriers for the crypto industry and the investors. By asserting the SEC’s jurisdiction and mandate over a large segment of the crypto space, Gensler could create more confusion, uncertainty, and conflict among different regulators and jurisdictions. By imposing registration and reporting requirements, Gensler could increase the regulatory burden and complexity for the crypto projects and platforms. By initiating enforcement actions and litigation, Gensler could deter innovation and investment in the crypto space.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Gensler’s stance on Bitcoin, other cryptocurrencies, and stablecoins is a reflection of his background, philosophy, and intentions as the SEC chair. He is a crypto-friendly but also crypto-savvy regulator who understands the potential benefits and risks of the nascent industry. He is also a pragmatic but principled regulator who believes in applying the existing laws and rules to the crypto space consistently and fairly.

It is important to note that his stance has significant implications for the crypto industry and the investors. It could provide more clarity, certainty, and legitimacy for the crypto space, but it could also pose more challenges, costs, and barriers for the crypto space. The ultimate outcome of his stance will depend on how he implements his vision and how the industry responds to his actions.

 

 

Source: https://www.securities.io/gary-gensler-crypto-perspective-why-bitcoin-is-not-a-security-but-refuses-to-say-its-a-commodity/

Anndy Lian is an early blockchain adopter and experienced serial entrepreneur who is known for his work in the government sector. He is a best selling book author- “NFT: From Zero to Hero” and “Blockchain Revolution 2030”.

Currently, he is appointed as the Chief Digital Advisor at Mongolia Productivity Organization, championing national digitization. Prior to his current appointments, he was the Chairman of BigONE Exchange, a global top 30 ranked crypto spot exchange and was also the Advisory Board Member for Hyundai DAC, the blockchain arm of South Korea’s largest car manufacturer Hyundai Motor Group. Lian played a pivotal role as the Blockchain Advisor for Asian Productivity Organisation (APO), an intergovernmental organization committed to improving productivity in the Asia-Pacific region.

An avid supporter of incubating start-ups, Anndy has also been a private investor for the past eight years. With a growth investment mindset, Anndy strategically demonstrates this in the companies he chooses to be involved with. He believes that what he is doing through blockchain technology currently will revolutionise and redefine traditional businesses. He also believes that the blockchain industry has to be “redecentralised”.

j j j

SEC chair Gensler confirms “everything other than Bitcoin” is a security: Implications and analysis

SEC chair Gensler confirms “everything other than Bitcoin” is a security: Implications and analysis

SEC Chair Gary Gensler reiterated that Bitcoin is not a security but a commodity under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) purview. He also stated that “everything else other than bitcoin is a security,” which has significant implications for regulating cryptocurrencies and digital assets in the United States.

Gensler’s statement reflects the SEC’s long-held view that many cryptocurrencies and digital assets are securities under U.S. law. The SEC’s definition of a security is broad — it includes any investment contract in which an individual invests money in a common enterprise with the expectation of profits solely from the efforts of others. In other words, if an asset is sold as an investment with the expectation of profit based on the efforts of others, it is likely to be considered a security.

Gensler’s comments have sparked debate in the cryptocurrency community. Some argue that his view is overly broad and that many digital assets do not fit the SEC’s definition of a security. Others argue that the SEC’s approach is necessary to protect investors from fraudulent or manipulative activities in the cryptocurrency market.

One of the key implications of Gensler’s comments is that many digital assets may be subject to SEC regulation. This could include initial coin offerings (ICOs), a crowdfunding campaign where investors purchase digital tokens in exchange for cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin or Ethereum. Many ICOs have been criticized for their lack of transparency and accountability, and the SEC has taken enforcement action against several ICO issuers in recent years.

Another implication is that exchanges that trade digital assets may be subject to SEC oversight. Under U.S. law, exchanges facilitating securities trading must register with the SEC and comply with various regulations. If the SEC views many digital assets as securities, then exchanges that trade those assets may also be required to register with the SEC and comply with its regulations.

His comments suggest that the SEC may take a more aggressive approach to regulating the cryptocurrency market. This could include increased enforcement actions against issuers of digital assets considered securities and against exchanges that facilitate trading those assets. It could also lead to new regulations to increase transparency and accountability in the cryptocurrency market.

The SEC’s approach to regulating cryptocurrency has been debated for several years. Some argue that the SEC’s current approach is too cautious and stifling innovation in the cryptocurrency space. Others argue that increased regulation is necessary to protect investors from fraud and manipulation.

Gensler’s comments suggest that the SEC will likely take a more assertive approach to regulate the cryptocurrency market in the coming years. This could include increased enforcement actions, new regulations, and closer scrutiny of digital assets and exchanges that operates in the U.S.

Maybe we can take a step back to look into a few things. Firstly, it’s important to understand the context of Gensler’s statement. As mentioned earlier, Gensler reiterated the SEC’s stance in an interview with CNBC in July 2022 that Bitcoin is not a security but a commodity that falls under the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s jurisdiction. He did not label other digital assets, avoiding answering the question directly. However, in a tweet by Jake Chervinsky in February 2023, it was suggested that Gensler may have prejudged that every digital asset aside from Bitcoin is a security.

Then my question is: What exactly is a security? In the US, the Securities Act of 1933 defines a security as any investment contract, note, stock, or any other type of investment in a common enterprise with the expectation of profits solely from the efforts of others. In simpler terms, it means an asset representing an ownership interest or a right to receive future profits or cash flows from a third party.

Suppose we consider Gensler’s statement that everything other than Bitcoin is a security. In that case, it implies that most digital assets such as Ethereum, XRP, and other cryptocurrencies would be considered securities under US law. This means that they would be subject to SEC regulations and oversight. It’s worth noting that this is not a new position for the SEC. For years, the SEC has warned cryptocurrency companies that their tokens could be classified as securities if they meet certain criteria.

The implications of this classification are significant. If a digital asset is classified as a security, the issuer must comply with SEC regulations, including registration and disclosure requirements. It would also have to follow strict trading, reporting, and investor protection rules. Additionally, investors would be protected under federal securities laws, which could increase their confidence in the digital asset market. However, it could also lead to additional costs and regulatory burdens for the companies issuing digital assets.

My opinion on this matter is that while Gensler’s statement may have been perceived as a blanket statement, the SEC’s approach to regulating cryptocurrencies is nuanced and fact-specific. The SEC has been clear that it will evaluate each token on a case-by-case basis to determine whether it meets the legal definition of a security. In other words, just because a digital asset is not Bitcoin does not automatically mean it’s a security.

Furthermore, regulatory oversight is necessary for the cryptocurrency market to mature and gain mainstream adoption. The lack of clear regulations has been a major roadblock for institutional investors, who are hesitant to invest in a market perceived as unregulated and risky. Clear regulations would also protect retail investors who may not have the knowledge or resources to navigate the complex world of cryptocurrencies.

To conclude, while Gensler’s statement that “everything other than Bitcoin” is a security may have caused some alarm in the cryptocurrency community, we believe that it’s important to view it in the context of the SEC’s broader approach to regulating digital assets. The SEC’s focus on investor protection and market integrity is crucial for the long-term success of the cryptocurrency market.

As the market continues to evolve, we expect that the SEC’s approach will continue to evolve, and we look forward to seeing how it develops. Meanwhile, I hope SEC can be more precise and take a more responsible stance when putting statements out in the market.

 

Source: https://cryptoslate.com/sec-chair-gensler-confirms-everything-other-than-bitcoin-is-a-security-implications-and-analysis/

la

Anndy Lian is an early blockchain adopter and experienced serial entrepreneur who is known for his work in the government sector. He is a best selling book author- “NFT: From Zero to Hero” and “Blockchain Revolution 2030”.

Currently, he is appointed as the Chief Digital Advisor at Mongolia Productivity Organization, championing national digitization. Prior to his current appointments, he was the Chairman of BigONE Exchange, a global top 30 ranked crypto spot exchange and was also the Advisory Board Member for Hyundai DAC, the blockchain arm of South Korea’s largest car manufacturer Hyundai Motor Group. Lian played a pivotal role as the Blockchain Advisor for Asian Productivity Organisation (APO), an intergovernmental organization committed to improving productivity in the Asia-Pacific region.

An avid supporter of incubating start-ups, Anndy has also been a private investor for the past eight years. With a growth investment mindset, Anndy strategically demonstrates this in the companies he chooses to be involved with. He believes that what he is doing through blockchain technology currently will revolutionise and redefine traditional businesses. He also believes that the blockchain industry has to be “redecentralised”.

j j j