Jump to content
Molten

US House hearing with SEC on Sept 24

Recommended Posts

Interesting that this is the day after bitcoin's bakkt start date.  I hope they decide to regulate based on who's been playing by the rules already.  If the US house agrees on something that would be newsworthy also.  I hope Ripple's lobbying efforts have penetrated deep enough for some congressmen and women to take notice. I also hope that facebook does not suck the oxygen out of the room, they need to focus on cryptos that are already in production. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was this quote that raised my eyebrows: The SEC is currently in the midst of a consultation on a concept release regarding regulatory harmonization. The deadline on the concept release is the same day as the Committee hearing, September 24th.

Kind of sounds like they are releasing guidance, no?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Molten said:

It was this quote that raised my eyebrows: The SEC is currently in the midst of a consultation on a concept release regarding regulatory harmonization. The deadline on the concept release is the same day as the Committee hearing, September 24th.

Kind of sounds like they are releasing guidance, no?

“We need to be aware of not over regulating digital assets as we must guard against stifling innovation” is about as much as you’re gonna get I imagine.

Sorry I’m immediately cynical when it comes to these things lol.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, it just seems like in the past people have been trying to connect dots and see things that weren't there and we've been conditioned for let down because of this.  This seems like an actual instance in which the specific topic of crypto regulation will be discussed and a regulatory framework will be released.  There's a deadline and everything.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, rippledude said:

I hope they decide to regulate based on who's been playing by the rules already

This is exactly why they are in court, no? To clarify the rules with more specificity.

Edited by aye-epp

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Molten said:

It was this quote that raised my eyebrows: The SEC is currently in the midst of a consultation on a concept release regarding regulatory harmonization. The deadline on the concept release is the same day as the Committee hearing, September 24th.

Kind of sounds like they are releasing guidance, no?

This sounds promising

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, djdhrubs said:

“We need to be aware of not over regulating digital assets as we must guard against stifling innovation” is about as much as you’re gonna get I imagine.

Sorry I’m immediately cynical when it comes to these things lol.

I’m with you @djdhrubs,

I'm an optimist at most things in life except proper timely well-thought out and executed government action. Cynical is probably as high a level on the optimistic scale I can get when it comes predicting what the government will accomplish.

If they received outside help from Ripple, Deloitte and or others worthy of providing great input on how to craft regulatory guidance to spur growth, efficiency, eliminate fraud etc., AND they don’t dork it up by modifying it in some way because they’re “smarter”... then I think they will do good.

Other than that, history suggests governments take action only after the crisis has already started even if they have heard about it for decades prior. Now I know “The Fed” truly isn’t “the federal government” but they work for them (in theory) so, as a recent and applicable example of action after the fact:

https://markets.businessinsider.com/news/stocks/fed-repo-injects-another-75-billion-into-market-4th-day-2019-9-1028541586

Would love to be proven wrong and have the 24th of September to be a day for us all to remember...in a great way!

And from @Hodor‘s 19 September masterpiece, another example of US government inaction:

Question (Robert Patalano):  "... 𝘕𝘰𝘸 𝘸𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘵𝘸𝘰 𝘪𝘯𝘯𝘰𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴. 𝘺𝘰𝘶'𝘳𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘥𝘪𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘢𝘭 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘺𝘦𝘳𝘴, 𝘪𝘯 𝘢 𝘴𝘦𝘯𝘴𝘦; 𝘰𝘳 𝘺𝘰𝘶'𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘳𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘴𝘩𝘢𝘬𝘦 𝘶𝘱 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘵 𝘢𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘨𝘰 𝘵𝘩𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘨𝘩 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘤𝘦𝘴𝘴 .. 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵'𝘴 𝘱𝘢𝘳𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘦𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 - 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘬𝘴. 

𝘈𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶'𝘳𝘦 𝘵𝘢𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘬𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘢𝘴 𝘺𝘰𝘶'𝘳𝘦 𝘣𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘯𝘦𝘸 𝘵𝘦𝘤𝘩𝘯𝘰𝘭𝘰𝘨𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘮𝘢𝘳𝘬𝘦𝘵, 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘮𝘶𝘯𝘪𝘤𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵, 𝘣𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘥𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘤𝘭𝘪𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦, 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘬𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘰 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘴; 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘥𝘰 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘴𝘦𝘦 𝘪𝘵 𝘨𝘰𝘪𝘯𝘨? 𝘞𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘨𝘦𝘴 𝘥𝘰 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘧𝘢𝘤𝘦? 𝘏𝘰𝘸 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘺𝘰𝘶 𝘢𝘥𝘥𝘳𝘦𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦?" 

Answer (Breanne Madigan): "𝘖𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘰𝘳𝘺 𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦, 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘪𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘣𝘪𝘨 𝘩𝘶𝘳𝘥𝘭𝘦, 𝘐 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘬 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘪𝘮𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘢𝘯𝘤𝘦 𝘪𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘺 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘷𝘦𝘳𝘺 𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘴 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘤𝘪𝘱𝘭𝘦𝘴-𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘥 𝘳𝘢𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘯 𝘳𝘶𝘭𝘦𝘴-𝘣𝘢𝘴𝘦𝘥. 𝘉𝘦𝘤𝘢𝘶𝘴𝘦 𝘸𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘪𝘯 𝘴𝘶𝘤𝘩 𝘢 𝘯𝘢𝘴𝘤𝘦𝘯𝘵 𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘨𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘯𝘥𝘶𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘺'𝘴 𝘥𝘦𝘷𝘦𝘭𝘰𝘱𝘮𝘦𝘯𝘵, 𝘸𝘦 𝘯𝘦𝘦𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘧𝘭𝘦𝘹𝘪𝘣𝘪𝘭𝘪𝘵𝘺 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘰 𝘢𝘭𝘭𝘰𝘸 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘣𝘦 𝘯𝘪𝘮𝘣𝘭𝘦; 𝘣𝘶𝘵 𝘴𝘵𝘪𝘭𝘭 𝘢𝘥𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘪𝘯𝘨 (𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘳𝘦𝘨𝘶𝘭𝘢𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴); 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘜.𝘚., 𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘩 𝘴𝘰𝘮𝘦 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘢𝘱𝘱𝘳𝘰𝘢𝘤𝘩𝘦𝘴 𝘵𝘰 𝘥𝘢𝘵𝘦, 𝘸𝘦'𝘳𝘦 𝘴𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘮𝘪𝘴𝘴𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘰𝘶𝘵. 

𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦'𝘴 𝘣𝘦𝘦𝘯 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳 𝘫𝘶𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘥𝘪𝘤𝘵𝘪𝘰𝘯𝘴 - 𝘚𝘸𝘪𝘵𝘻𝘦𝘳𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘚𝘪𝘯𝘨𝘢𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘰𝘵𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘴 - 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘩𝘢𝘷𝘦 𝘦𝘴𝘵𝘢𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘴𝘩𝘦𝘥 𝘮𝘰𝘳𝘦 𝘤𝘭𝘦𝘢𝘳 𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘮𝘦𝘸𝘰𝘳𝘬𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘸𝘦 𝘢𝘳𝘦 𝘢𝘵 𝘳𝘪𝘴𝘬 𝘪𝘯 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘜.𝘚., 𝘸𝘩𝘪𝘤𝘩 𝘪𝘴 𝘸𝘩𝘦𝘳𝘦 𝘰𝘶𝘳 𝘤𝘰𝘮𝘱𝘢𝘯𝘺 𝘪𝘴 𝘩𝘦𝘢𝘥𝘲𝘶𝘢𝘳𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘦𝘥, 𝘰𝘧 𝘧𝘭𝘪𝘨𝘩𝘵 𝘰𝘧 𝘵𝘢𝘭𝘦𝘯𝘵 ..."

Edited by Roaring_Twenties
Provide an additional example of support

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, aye-epp said:

This is exactly why they are in court, no? To clarify the rules with more specificity.

Yes this would be great.  Get all the congress people informed of the potential revolutionary advantages of crypto.  Set the rules, and let people decide the winners and losers.  Oversight is key with regulation.  Ripple has been at this so long they are ready for it I'm sure.  Every day that goes by in the states without clarification is a step closer for a company like Ripple located outside the u.s. to take Ripple's first mover advantage away.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This hearing has nothing to do with Ripple's court case and that court case will not yield any info about regulation.

This US hearing is precisely about regulation and it sounds as though the SEC is expected (required) to file a conceptual framework for unified regulation.  I am unsure as to why this isn't getting more press, unless I am completely mistaken, because it sounds like this is literally the thing that everyone has been waiting for for years now. 

Edited by Molten

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It sounds to me like Facebook's Libra is what spurred them to take this action.  I think they will declare Libra's Investment Token as a security, which well they should, since it has no utility and is only meant to raise capital.  If I have to guess, I would say that they will roughly conclude that any digital asset that has clear utility (XRP being chief amongst them) will be declared a currency or commodity, not a security.   At the very least, I expect them to suggest as much in their conceptual framework.  I don't expect them to come out and state "XRP is not a security".

I don't know how you could rightfully call something that is being used in the real world as a remittance tool a security, but the government never ceases to amaze.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

After reading through the SEC's web page and other sources about how the rules and regulations that the SEC relies on are actually formulated, I'm left with the impression that it's Congress who ultimately writes the laws. The SEC works to help guide them, but in general, they aren't the one's who ultimately craft them. They do however, have the authority to interpret and implement the law as they see appropriate. If my understanding of all of this is correct, then yes, this meeting will be a very big deal for moving forward on regulatory clarity. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I FaceBook automatically included a wallet for everyone in their software,  and with a KYC enabled activation process,  then grant earnings based on views and follows on your wall......then no real earning from FB from an "ICO" type coin......then this Libra would take on value based on doing something...people could sell or trade their value,  buy on marketplace within facebook, etc.....  getting away from anything that looks "Security-ish"  would help their case.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×
×
  • Create New...