SEC Crypto Bulletin in Doubt, More About It

  • The US government has accused the SEC of neglecting important steps in monitoring obligations.
  • This situation has led to a debate about whether the newspaper should be classified as “authority.”

On October 31, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security expressed concern about cryptocurrency-related messages from the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

In particular, the accountability watchdog accused the SEC of neglecting important steps in introducing accounting and disclosure oversight obligations. This is about protecting users’ cryptocurrency holdings.

Most of the controversy revolves around the SEC’s failure to submit the information required to Congress under the CRA and to the Comptroller before implementing the regulations.

This situation has led to a debate about whether the newspaper should be classified as “authority.” The accountability center argued that the newsletters meet the specific requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act (APA), so the required information must be submitted. .

In response, the SEC held that the newsletter did not qualify under the law because it did not contain the characteristics of a corporate entity or the terms of a corporate agreement.

Battle of distributed control

The implications of this conflict are still unclear. It also raises questions about the agency’s accountability as an independent agency under US law.

The source of this controversy goes back to March 24. The SEC published the relevant instructions on the Official Journal of the Market No. 121 (Bulletin).

This newsletter recommends that companies include hedged cryptocurrencies as liabilities on their balance sheets at fair value, as well as assets.

However, this change from traditional practice has caused controversy among Republican lawmakers, who have expressed concern about its implications. They argued that this change affects banking practices, especially in relation to the management of asset management.

One senator, Andy Barr (R-Ky.), expressed fear that the amendment could discourage banks from providing oversight to digital assets.

SEC Chairman Gary Gensler defended the suggestion. He emphasized the importance of both banks and public companies including information related to cryptocurrencies in their balance sheets.

The SEC has come under a wave of criticism from many for its handling of crypto companies without clear regulations. SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce has criticized the SEC’s handling of crypto startup LBRY.

Peirce expressed concern about the lack of transparency and a clear way for companies like LBRY to register their token offerings. For the uninitiated, LBRY recently announced its closure after the SEC accused the company of selling unregistered securities.

This is an automatic translation of our English version.

Check Also

Aptos will launch a crypto wallet in South Korea, more information about it

Aptos has a long history of operations in South Korea, with some challenging developments. The …

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *