Connect with us

Regulation

Winklevoss Twins Donate $1M to Deaton to Unseat Senator Warren

Published

on


Gemini co-founders Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss have each contributed $500,000 worth of Bitcoin to John Deaton’s political campaign to defeat Senator Elizabeth Warren.

The Winklevoss twins, who are quite involved in the cryptocurrency business, want to back a candidate that has their cryptocurrency and business-friendly vision.

Winklevoss Twins Donate $1M to Deaton

Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss have contributed a large amount of money to John Deaton’s campaign. They contributed 16 Bitcoin worth a total of $1M to support Deaton in his bid to unseat US Senator Elizabeth Warren. This generous contribution shows the twins’ loyalty to supporting a crypto-friendly candidate they think will further the cause of the cryptocurrency industry.

John Deaton, an advocate of cryptocurrencies and a lawyer representing the crypto industry, has received endorsements from several personalities and organizations in the crypto space. Deaton has been a lawyer representing the industry and has been known to fight against what he considers as unjust actions of Senator Warren and her supporters.

Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss have been very critical of the senator indicating that she poses a great danger to the American economy thanks to her position on cryptocurrencies. Tyler Winklevoss said,

“John Deaton is an American hero; Elizabeth Warren is not. John Deaton is a pro-Bitcoin, pro-crypto, and pro-business candidate; Elizabeth Warren is not. She is a lawmaker who can’t pass a law. She is a celebrity over results. Politician over leader. Form over substance.’

Reasons for Support to Unseat Warren

In the report, the Winklevoss twins claim that Senator Warren’s regulatory stance on the cryptocurrency market has posed a detrimental effect on the industry. They have accused Warren of using the government to persecute the crypto industry through debanking and other forms of bad faith enforcement. Specifically, they mention Gary Gensler, the head of the SEC, and Martin Gruenberg, the head of the FDIC, as examples of Warren’s influence.

Also, they posit that under Warren’s leadership, the SEC has conducted many investigations and has taken legal actions against crypto firms, while the FDIC’s Operation Choke Point 2. 0 pressures banks not to engage in legal crypto businesses.

According to the twins, this feud started during the 2020 Presidential campaign when Biden was vying for the ticket to run for the presidency and he needed the support of Warren. In return, Biden gave her veto power over his regulatory agency nominees, thereby handing the reins of the US economy to her.

They argue that this arrangement made sure that Warren’s appointees were at the helm of these agencies and implemented her orders. Consequently, with Biden’s odd to step down the presidential race rising to 80%, they seek Senator Warren to be unseated, too.

Ripple Donates $1 Million to Support Deaton

Ripple Labs also contributed a large amount to John Deaton’s Senate campaign just a month ago. The company contributed $1 million to the Commonwealth Unity Fund, a super PAC created by pro-crypto attorney James Murphy, also known as MetaLawMan. This donation was regarded as a direct response to Senator Warren’s rigid approach to cryptocurrency regulation.

According to James Murphy, this election is crucial for the further development of the crypto industry. He encouraged the crypto world and particularly the XRP holders to help fund the Commonwealth Unity Fund and support Deaton.

Similarly, Cameron and Tyler Winklevoss both contributed $1 million worth of Bitcoin to Trump’s campaign in the last week of June in support of his pro-crypto stance. However, this amount was above the $844,600 that is allowed for contributions to political campaigns by an individual. Therefore, Coingape reported that the extra $155,400 from each contribution was refunded to the Winklevoss twins.

Read Also: Notcoin Price Analysis: Rebound or Further Decline Ahead?

✓ Share:

Kelvin is a distinguished writer specializing in crypto and finance, backed by a Bachelor’s in Actuarial Science. Recognized for incisive analysis and insightful content, he has an adept command of English and excels at thorough research and timely delivery.

The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.





Source link

Regulation

Ex SEC Official Blasts US SEC Amid Rari Capital Settlement Charges

Published

on

By


An ex-SEC official has raised concerns over the regulatory body’s approach to digital assets, coinciding with a recent settlement involving the decentralized finance (DeFi) platform, Rari Capital.

Michael Liftik, an ex SEC official and current partner at law firm Quinn Emanuel, emphasized the agency’s reluctance to issue clear guidelines for digital assets, while pursuing enforcement actions against firms in the sector. His remarks have sparked further debate on the SEC’s regulatory strategy.

Rari Capital Settlement with the SEC

The SEC has announced it had settled charges against Rari Capital and its co-founders. The DeFi platform, which offered yield-bearing services to crypto investors, faced accusations of misleading investors and engaging in unregistered broker activity. 

Rari Capital’s Earn pools, marketed as being able to autonomously manage and rebalance investments, were found to require manual intervention, contradicting the firm’s claims.

The settlement also covered activities related to Rari’s Fuse pools, with the agency stating that the co-founders, Jai Bhavnani, Jack Lipstone, and David Lucid, were involved in broker activities without proper registration. At its peak, the platform held over $1 billion in assets. Though Rari Capital and its executives neither admitted nor denied the charges, they agreed to cease breaking securities laws in the future.

Ex SEC Official Blasts Approach to Enforcement

Liftik’s criticism of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s approach resonates with broader discontent within the crypto industry. He highlighted the agency’s preference for enforcement actions over rulemaking or providing clear guidance.

In addition, the ex-SEC Official noted that the agency’s reliance on a “whack-a-mole” enforcement strategy, where firms are targeted one by one, creates a difficult operating environment for companies trying to comply with evolving rules.

This criticism comes as the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission continues to scrutinize decentralized finance platforms. Over recent years, several firms, both centralized and decentralized, have been charged with securities violations, reinforcing Liftik’s argument. The agency has made it clear that labeling a platform as “decentralized” or “autonomous” does not exempt it from securities laws.

Rari Capital’s History and Hack Incident

Rari Capital’s legal troubles were compounded by a significant exploit in May 2022, when its Fuse borrowing and lending platform was hacked, leading to the theft of $80 million.

As a result, the hack forced the firm to halt new deposits and begin winding down the platform, leading to its eventual shutdown.

In the agency’s settlement, the agency acknowledged the firm’s cooperation in returning performance-based fees to affected users and its remedial efforts in response to the hack. The settlement with Rari Capital Infrastructure LLC, which took over the firm after the hack, further stipulated that the company must refrain from violating securities laws in the future.

Growing Regulatory Divide in U.S. Crypto Legislation

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s latest actions come amid an ongoing debate in Congress over crypto regulation. Recent hearings have exposed a divide among lawmakers regarding how the digital asset industry should be regulated. A memo circulating in Congress suggests that some Democratic leaders view crypto as a partisan issue, labeling it as an innovation aligned with “extreme MAGA Republicans.”

Concurrent with the ex-SEC official statements, this political divide has heightened tensions as regulators and lawmakers attempt to craft comprehensive crypto legislation. Proposals such as the FIT 21 bill, which aims to classify digital assets and modernize securities laws, remain a focal point of debate.

Critics argue that the current regulatory environment under the Biden administration is stifling innovation, while proponents of tighter regulations advocate for stronger investor protections.

✓ Share:

Kelvin Munene Murithi

Kelvin is a distinguished writer with expertise in crypto and finance, holding a Bachelor’s degree in Actuarial Science. Known for his incisive analysis and insightful content, he possesses a strong command of English and excels in conducting thorough research and delivering timely cryptocurrency market updates.

Disclaimer: The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.





Source link

Continue Reading

Regulation

Federal Reserve Meeting Major Highlights and Key Points

Published

on

By


The Federal Reserve lowered the target range for the federal funds rate by 50 basis points on Wednesday. This action brings the rate to a new range of 4.75% to 5.00%, which is the first decline in four years. The decision is in line with the Fed’s policy of ensuring that inflation is kept in check without jeopardising the stability of the economy.

Federal Reserve’s Justification for Rate Cut

The Federal Reserve announced the rate cut citing recent economic figures that pointed to growth at a steady pace, but with some moderation. Although job creation has slowed down and the unemployment rate has risen marginally, inflation is slowly moving towards the Fed’s target of 2%.

The central bank considers the outlook for the economy as still cloudy however, it views the risks to achievement of the dual mandate as evenly split.

Chair Jerome Powell noted that this decision is a small step to fine-tune policy to help maintain economic conditions. He told the market that the Fed is still determined to meet its employment and inflation targets. In addition, the Fed is likely to go on reviewing the data flow and may change the course of its policy should new economic circumstances occur.

Powell’s Perspective on the Economic Landscape

Jerome Powell noted that the US economy is healthy, and the economic growth is expected to remain strong. Inflation is gradually coming down while the labor market remains robust even as job creation slows down. 

The Fed Chair emphasized that the Fed’s goal is to return inflation to its target level without causing a sharp increase in unemployment, which is typical for disinflation.

The head of the central bank also added that the low interest rate environment that has been observed in the previous years is not expected to continue in the future. Powell admitted that the neutral rate – the interest rate that does not stimulate or hinder economic growth– could be much higher now but it is still unclear just how high it is. This shift is a break from previous monetary policies that have involved extended periods of near-zero interest rates.

Reactions to the Federal Reserve’s Decision

However, the rate cut was not supported by all members of the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) as the Fed Governor Michelle Bowman voted for a 25 basis point cut. Nevertheless, the Fed Chair stressed that there was consensus within the committee regarding the need for policy change. He stressed that the decision would be taken from one meeting to another, considering the current and forecasted trends.

Some of the investors have been supportive but many of them have raised their concerns that the 50 basis points cut was too much. Financial markets expressed their reaction with keen interest with the S&P 500 and the Dow Jones setting new highs after the announcement. However, concerns over the size and the time of the cut diminished the rally, as some think that the economy is still quite healthy and did not necessitate such a deep cut.

Moving forward, the Federal Reserve’s Summary of Economic Projections (SEP) indicates that interest rates may fall even more in 2025 and 2026. According to the SEP, rates could be at 4.25% to 4.5% by the end of this year with more possible cuts to follow. According to its current forecasts, the central bank expects interest rates to reach 2.9% by 2026, which may suggest a further softening of monetary policy.

While the Fed decided to decrease rates, Jerome Powell noted that this does not mean that the same trend will persist in the future. He emphasized that each decision will be made based on current and future economic conditions and information. Thus, the market participants should not anticipate the central bank to deliver similar decisions at the subsequent meetings.

Labor Market and Inflation Considerations

The Federal Reserve has also paid keen interest to the labor market leading to this rate cut. As the Fed Chair pointed out, although job creation has decelerated in the past few months, the labor market is still very close to full capacity. However, the Fed is keeping a close eye on these trends, as a sharp decline in job growth could be indicative of an economic decline.

Concurrently, inflation remains the primary concern for the Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC). The Fed Chair stated that, according to the PCE price index, inflation is projected to decline to 2.2% in August from 2.5% in July. This action takes inflation rate nearer to the Fed’s 2% target, thus strengthening the Fed’s stance on the policy adjustment.

Despite the positive signs, some experts worry that the Fed might be acting too quickly. They argue that the U.S. economy remains robust, with unemployment still relatively low, and that further easing could spark unnecessary risks, such as asset bubbles or overheating in certain sectors. Nevertheless, Jerome Powell maintained that the Fed’s approach has been patient and that its decision to cut rates reflects confidence in inflation’s steady decline.

✓ Share:

Kelvin Munene Murithi

Kelvin is a distinguished writer with expertise in crypto and finance, holding a Bachelor’s degree in Actuarial Science. Known for his incisive analysis and insightful content, he possesses a strong command of English and excels in conducting thorough research and delivering timely cryptocurrency market updates.

Disclaimer: The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.





Source link

Continue Reading

Regulation

US Lawmakers Slam SEC Chair Gary Gensler Over Airdrop Securities Classification

Published

on

By


Two prominent U.S. lawmakers, House Majority Whip Tom Emmer and House Financial Services Committee Chairman Patrick McHenry, have raised concerns over the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) approach to classifying airdrops as securities. In a letter dated September 2024, they addressed SEC Chair Gary Gensler, questioning the agency’s stance on airdrops.

Contents of Letter To Gary Gensler

The letter highlights the importance of airdrops in the blockchain ecosystem. It describes them as “distributions of a digital asset to early users of a blockchain protocol.” Moreover, the lawmakers stated that crypto airdrops “play a crucial role in the development of a decentralized blockchain ecosystem.”

According to the lawmakers, airdrops incentivize participation in blockchain-based applications, contributing to the network’s decentralization and governance. The letter criticized the SEC under Gary Gensler’s leadership for stifling the growth of blockchain by creating a “hostile regulatory environment.”

The lawmakers argued that the SEC’s actions are making “the goal of decentralization impossible to obtain” and preventing the technology from reaching its full potential. They further allege that by issuing enforcement actions and warnings, the SEC is “putting its thumb on the scale” and precluding U.S. citizens from participating in the development of the internet’s next generation.

In addition, Emmer and McHenry posed a series of pointed questions to Gary Gensler. They sought clarification on the SEC’s interpretation of securities law in relation to airdrops. A key question is whether the SEC believes that giving away digital assets for free could trigger the Howey Test.

For further context, the Howey Test is the legal standard for determining if a transaction qualifies as an investment contract under U.S. law. This question also arises since the assets themselves are not classified as securities.

The lawmakers wrote, “Does the SEC believe that giving away non-security digital assets for free implicates the Howey Test? If so, under what circumstances or arrangements?” The letter also compares crypto asset airdrops to other forms of consumer rewards.

Questions To SEC Chair

The rewards include airline miles or credit card points, which do not fall under the Howey Test. “How does the SEC distinguish between these rewards, given away for free, and digital assets airdropped to an individual?” the lawmakers asked.

Additionally, the letter to Gary Gensler also raises concerns about the potential impact of classifying digital tokens as securities on the broader blockchain ecosystem. Emmer and McHenry pointed out that as networks become more decentralized, token values are driven by “demand for their consumptive use, akin to a commodity.”

They warned that the SEC’s approach could hinder the ability of on-chain applications to function. Hence they asked, “How might classifying these tokens as securities and subjecting each transaction to the scrutiny of the SEC impact the ability for on-chain applications to exist or function?”

The lawmakers also requested data on whether the SEC has quantified the economic impact of classifying digital assets as securities. This comes particularly in terms of potential loss of economic growth and tax revenue. Furthermore, they noted that developers are already blocking American users from participating in airdrops due to the SEC’s regulation.

Emmer and McHenry requested a response from Gensler by September 30, 2024. Meanwhile, the agency gears up for a September 18 congressional hearing on political bias in crypto regulation.

✓ Share:

Kelvin Munene Murithi

Kelvin is a distinguished writer with expertise in crypto and finance, holding a Bachelor’s degree in Actuarial Science. Known for his incisive analysis and insightful content, he possesses a strong command of English and excels in conducting thorough research and delivering timely cryptocurrency market updates.

Disclaimer: The presented content may include the personal opinion of the author and is subject to market condition. Do your market research before investing in cryptocurrencies. The author or the publication does not hold any responsibility for your personal financial loss.





Source link

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2024 coin2049.io