As a seasoned researcher with years of experience delving into the complexities of financial regulations and digital currencies, I find the ongoing legal battle between Kraken and the SEC fascinating. It’s reminiscent of the Wild West era, where the rapid expansion of a new frontier (in this case, cryptocurrency) is being met with attempts to apply existing laws that may not perfectly fit the situation.
kraken, a significant American cryptocurrency trading platform, has officially asked for a trial by jury in the lawsuit started by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), as stated in a recent court document.
As an analyst, I’ve just learned that our filing follows a California court ruling last month, which allowed the SEC’s lawsuit against Kraken to go to trial. This case is reminiscent of other legal actions initiated by the SEC against prominent exchanges such as Binance and Coinbase. These platforms have been accused of similar violations – failing to register as brokers, clearinghouses, or exchanges under federal securities laws.
Back in November, the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) initiated a lawsuit in the Northern District of California against Kraken, aiming to prevent them from breaching securities laws permanently. The regulatory body requested that Kraken return any profits (disgorgement) made illegally, along with additional civil penalties. More specifically, the SEC accused 11 tokens such as ADA, ALGO, ATOM, FIL, and SOL of being unregistered securities, which they claim were offered and sold on Kraken’s platform without proper registration.
In a filing made on Thursday, Kraken countered all charges levied by the SEC and presented 18 legal defenses. Crucially, they emphasized that none of these defenses were founded on any illegal activities.
The argument put forth by the exchange is grounded in its understanding of both the Securities Act and the Exchange Act, which do not explicitly include digital assets within their scope. Kraken maintains that it has no obligation to register with the SEC because it does not function as a broker-dealer, an exchange, or a clearinghouse according to those acts’ definitions.
Kraken asserts that their digital assets are not considered “investment contracts” and thus fall outside the purview of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The company contends that these tokens lack the defining traits of conventional securities such as stocks or bonds, arguing that the SEC is stretching the boundaries by applying outdated regulations to the burgeoning cryptocurrency market.
Kraken contends that the SEC has breached due process and unjustifiably singled it out for using its First Amendment freedoms. The platform maintains that its offerings such as margin trading and over-the-counter (OTC) trading do not classify it as a securities exchange, clearinghouse, or broker-dealer.
Preparing for a court trial, the result of this Kraken case may carry substantial consequences for the wider world of digital currencies.
Read More
Sorry. No data so far.
2024-09-13 18:46