As a seasoned financial analyst with over two decades of industry experience, I have witnessed regulatory bodies evolve and adapt to the ever-changing financial landscape. However, the current situation surrounding the SEC and its approach to crypto regulation seems to be a unique challenge that demands attention.
At a comprehensive congressional hearing, all five Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) commissioners, including crypto-critic chairman Gary Gensler, faced criticism for the agency’s aggressive regulatory stance, often referred to as their “no-mercy” approach.
For the initial time since 2019, Gary Gensler, chair of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), along with commissioners Hester Peirce, Mark Uyeda, Caroline Crenshaw, and Jamie Lizárraga, addressed members of the U.S. House Financial Services Committee regarding cryptocurrency regulation.
Critics, including lawmakers, have voiced disapproval towards SEC Chair Gary Gensler and the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) for their assertive approach to regulating digital assets. For a considerable period, advocates of the sector and certain politicians have claimed that this strategy from Gensler and the SEC has created policy instability in the emerging industry.
At today’s hearing, Chairman Patrick McHenry expressed his views on the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC):— Financial Services GOP (@FinancialCmte) September 24, 2024
During a discussion, both Gensler, known for his views that many digital currencies resemble securities, and Commissioner Peirce who often disagrees, were asked to clarify the Securities and Exchange Commission’s ambiguous terminology regarding virtual currencies on blockchain platforms such as Ethereum (ETH).
According to Peirce, the agency hasn’t clearly defined its regulations for cryptocurrencies, even though it has the means to eliminate confusion. She believes that using vague terminology, like implying that crypto tokens are automatically considered securities, has made it harder for the agency to manage financial markets effectively.
French Representative French Hill expressed agreement with Peirce’s standpoint, stating that the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has been taking the lead in regulating cryptocurrency ahead of Congress. He argued that the SEC has tried to take control over crypto oversight through extensive enforcement actions. Hill and Peirce underscored the need for legislative support from Congress to establish a well-rounded regulatory system, as they believe the SEC (often referred to as the “rogue SEC”) has deliberately avoided rulemaking in this area.
Representative Tom Emmer strongly criticized Chairman Gensler for coining phrases such as “cryptocurrency asset security.” However, the agency has since retracted this alleged abbreviation and promised not to use it in future legal proceedings.
As a crypto investor, I’m deeply concerned about the ongoing discussions between Ranking Member Maxine Waters and Chair Patrick McHenry regarding stablecoin policies. With McHenry retiring early in 2025, it’s crucial that they finalize these negotiations before year-end in 2024. The implications of their decisions could significantly reshape the global digital economy. Experts from Bitwise and S&P have hinted at this potential transformation if a bill is passed.
Gensler and SEC under Congressional squeeze
The hearing, named “Monitoring the Securities and Exchange Commission,” followed closely upon the heels of the Financial Services Committee’s debate titled “Dazed and Confused: Analyzing the SEC’s Partisan Stance on Digital Assets.” In the recent past, Gensler and the commission have also encountered criticism from lawmakers and private consultants.
Dan Gallagher, a past SEC commissioner and current Chief Legal Officer at Robinhood, reminisced about the scarcity of communication from SEC personnel during their endeavor to register as a digital asset exchange, suggesting minimal engagement from the SEC staff.
Gallagher’s statement during the congressional hearing, in which he was joined by all five SEC commissioners, strongly suggested that it is only Congress who has the power to address the SEC’s lack of clear regulation regarding cryptocurrencies.
Prior to the FSC meeting on September 24th, Republican legislators headed by Committee chair Patrick McHenry requested that the SEC, Federal Reserve, Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and Office of the Comptroller of the Currency rescind Staff Accounting Bulletin 121. In simpler terms, they asked these organizations to repeal or withdraw SAB 121 before the said meeting.
On the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) official website, it is stated that Staff Bulletins such as SAB 121 are not formal interpretations of the agency. However, GOP Representatives have pointed this out. Interestingly, it seems that the SEC staff have been conducting private meetings with certain companies and granting exemptions under SAB 121 in these closed-door sessions.
The news elicited displeasure from participants within the cryptocurrency sector, who alleged that the Securities and Exchange Commission was favoring certain competitors in the cutthroat digital asset safekeeping business by unjustly choosing winners and losers.
It’s uncertain if Bank of New York Mellon, the top custodial bank in the U.S., was granted an exemption under SAB 121 during any secret consultations that are being claimed.
Prior to the GOP letter, Republican officials had voiced concerns about possible political bias in hiring and advancement within Gensler’s team at the SEC. On September 25, Gensler was set to appear before the Senate Banking Committee for another hearing. However, the session was delayed, and a new date has yet to be announced as of press time.
Read More
Sorry. No data so far.
2024-09-24 20:44