SEC

cyger

Meanwhile the SEC is targeting well meaning, market leading, law biding firms, and protecting NO ONE.

ccModBot

Thank you for submitting to /r/CryptoCurrency, Your post has been removed because there are already 2 posts about SEC in the top 50. You may post it again when the topic is no longer at the limit. ---[**Click here for a link to view the current limits**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/wiki/topic_limits)--- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the [moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcryptocurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*

HODL_monk

You misread my comments. Its not 'number go up' that makes something a security, its needing the provider to do work for you going forward, to maintain its monetary value, that is the reason. Because the current NFT's need the provider to host them, they require more work from the creator or seller. This is just a technological limitation, and there is no reason they can't be redesigned to avoid this. I think it was a 'strike when the iron is hot' situation, and these things were just rushed out for a quick buck, like ICO's, without any thoughts to the long term, which also makes the SEC more interested in cracking down on them, because they look like a get rich scheme, like almost everything in crypto.

nikkiM33

Unregistered security in the eyes of the SEC. Federal crime

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) charged Galois Capital for failing to ensure client assets were held with a qualified custodian, instead using unqualified platforms like FTX. Galois agreed to a $225,000 civil penalty to be distributed to harmed investors. The SEC highlighted that about half of the fund's assets managed by Galois were lost due to the collapse of FTX. Galois also misled some investors regarding withdrawal notices. Without admitting or denying the allegations, Galois agreed to the penalty and an order preventing further violations. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

GreedVault

Garlinghouse needs more self-criticism than pointing fingers at SEC. He is no better, or even worse.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Ripple is set to launch its US dollar-pegged stablecoin, Ripple USD (RLUSD), soon, as announced by CEO Brad Garlinghouse at Korea Blockchain Week. Currently in closed beta, RLUSD aims to bridge traditional finance with decentralized finance (DeFi) and improve payment infrastructure within the Ripple network. Fully backed by USD and short-term US government bonds, it seeks to compete with leading stablecoins like USDT and USDC. Despite regulatory challenges from the SEC, Garlinghouse remains optimistic about crypto's future. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

---Q_Q---

wait until the ETFs get approved by evil SEC thats pushing price down theres gonna be a god candle to 100k overnight .... oh wait

Abdeliq

I thought that was because of SEC

nikkiM33

Unregistered security in the eyes of the SEC. Federal crime

nikkiM33

Unregistered security in the eyes of the SEC. Federal crime

ccModBot

Thank you for submitting to /r/CryptoCurrency, Your post has been removed because there are already 2 posts about SEC in the top 50. You may post it again when the topic is no longer at the limit. ---[**Click here for a link to view the current limits**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/wiki/topic_limits)--- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the [moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcryptocurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Paul Grewal, Coinbase’s Chief Legal Officer, predicts a shift towards a 'pro-crypto' Congress in the U.S. following the 2024 elections, driven by bipartisan support for cryptocurrency. He contrasts this anticipated change with the current SEC's skeptical stance under Gary Gensler. Grewal highlights the bipartisan FIT 21 bill as a foundation for clearer crypto regulations and investor protections, suggesting a future regulatory environment focused more on legislation than litigation. He also notes Europe's pragmatic crypto regulations as a potential model for the U.S. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

partymsl

I hate the SEC, but I also hate Hedge Funds. So that's a W.

ccModBot

Thank you for submitting to /r/CryptoCurrency, Your post has been removed because there are already 2 posts about SEC in the top 50. You may post it again when the topic is no longer at the limit. ---[**Click here for a link to view the current limits**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/wiki/topic_limits)--- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the [moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcryptocurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*

HODL_monk

I'm going to push back on that logic a bit. Yes, an art reseller COULD later spend more money promoting the artists works, long after you made your purchase, but do you EXPLICITLY EXPECT them to do it, for YOU specifically, when you buy it ? Probably not. You might WANT them to do it, but you don't have a direct expectation of their future work on your behalf, to protect your 'investment'. THIS IS DIFFERENT WITH NFT's. Yes, its just a receipt hash, yes, in reality you own a tiny nothing burger, but most NFT buyers actually expect that their NFT will link to an actual JPG, which someone will keep a server running so it properly displays online, and the link keeps working. Many of them also act like they own the rights to the art as well, and you can see this, when they display the art publicly, like I have seen a physical picture of a Bored Ape, presented on a late night interview show, or reproduce it on a mural, as they have, also of a Bored Ape, in my town. The purchasers clearly have some expectations of work on the seller's behalf, both to maintain the imbedded link, and to have the full use of the art. Some sellers explicitly take a cut of any future sales of the NFT's, making the ownership right in it very different than physical art. NFT's are securities, because they have these security-like features. Of course the SEC provides no clarity, because they like regulating, and would rather sellers keep doing these 'security things', so they can fine them, rather than just spelling out what has to be done so they can be made not securities, because they KNOW that sellers WOULD do those things, if they knew what those things were. This is no way to run a regulatory body, which is why we either need to do away with the SEC, or more explicitly define what they regulate, rather than just throwing it over to the courts, every time a new XRP scam, or a JPEG selling scam, is dumped on the unsuspecting public.

ZmasterFlash69

What is a Ponzi scheme? “A Ponzi scheme is a type of investment fraud in which investors are promised big profits at little or no risk. The money is not invested. Rather, the scam artist concentrates on attracting more investors. A growing number of victims is needed to pay out the supposed profits being distributed to earlier investors.” 1. If Ripple (XRP) were a Ponzi scheme, logic says given an almost 4 year SEC lawsuit that this would have cone up? 2. Ripple has been using their XRP profits to develop their RippleNet product and the XRPL which now supports EVM side chains and connectivity to 55 other blockchains! 3. As volume on the XRPL continues to increase, its scalability and proven ability to handle massive load and transactions at a fraction of a penny ($0.01) will result in massive adoption for the inbound cross border payments of all tokenized assets! 4. Who else has over 500 announced Finternet partnerships and 1,700 NDA’s (unnamed partnerships) who have tested RippleNet, XRPL, XRP, EVM Side Chains including support for Smart Contracts), tokenization, etc.? 5. Evidence that mBridge, BRICS+, Russian Cebtral Bank, Indian Central Bank, 10 announced nation’s CBDC’s, and R3 Corda have tested and are using Ripple technology! 6. Ripple (XRP) are the antithesis of a Ponzi scheme and anyone who says otherwise is an uneducated fool.

Old-Confusion-3565

Working with the SEC and OpenSea is like trying to sail a boat through a storm—you’re just hoping you don’t get hit with a wave of paperwork or gas fees!

Abdeliq

SEC and security should work hand in hand... They seems to have interest in em

ccModBot

Thank you for submitting to /r/CryptoCurrency, Your post has been removed because there are already 2 posts about SEC in the top 50. You may post it again when the topic is no longer at the limit. ---[**Click here for a link to view the current limits**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/wiki/topic_limits)--- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the [moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcryptocurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*

nikkiM33

Unregistered security in the eyes of the SEC. Which is a federal crime.

ccModBot

Thank you for submitting to /r/CryptoCurrency, Your post has been removed because there are already 2 posts about SEC in the top 50. You may post it again when the topic is no longer at the limit. ---[**Click here for a link to view the current limits**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/wiki/topic_limits)--- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the [moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcryptocurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*

analogOnly

>It's clearly not legal to do that. Actually our banking system works on 0% reserve as of a couple of years ago. Thankfully the SEC has been holding these exchanges to have complete 1 to 1 backing after the FTX and multiple other debacles of insolvency.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The SEC is under scrutiny for its stance in the FTX bankruptcy case, similar to its controversial approach in the Voyager case. The SEC warned it might oppose plans to repay creditors with stablecoins or other digital assets due to potential legal concerns. This echoes its actions in the Voyager bankruptcy, where it objected to repayments in stablecoins, causing delays. Critics argue the SEC's vague objections and lack of clarity stall the bankruptcy process and fail to protect investors, introducing uncertainty into already complex cases. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

Baecchus

SEC is criticised for a lot of things

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Crypto executives and industry advocates are organizing a $100,000 fundraiser for US Vice President Kamala Harris, scheduled for September 13 in Washington, D.C. The event, hosted by the Blockchain Foundation and other crypto groups, aims to encourage a more lenient regulatory approach towards the crypto sector. Tickets range from $500 to $5,000. This initiative reflects the crypto community's effort to engage with Harris, hoping to influence her stance on digital assets and foster discussions on how her administration could support the crypto industry. The fundraiser occurs amidst increased regulatory scrutiny from the SEC under the Biden administration. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; On September 13, U.S. cryptocurrency executives plan to host a fundraiser in Washington for Vice President Kamala Harris, aiming to raise at least $100,000. The event, occurring between the Congressional Black Caucus and Congressional Hispanic Caucus conferences, seeks to gain Harris's support for more lenient crypto regulation amidst the Biden administration's SEC crackdown. Harris's stance on cryptocurrency remains unclear, and the industry is eager for her to reveal her policy intentions. This fundraiser represents a critical opportunity for Harris to engage with the crypto community's concerns and potentially clarify her position on cryptocurrency regulation. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

leavesmeplease

Yeah, sounds about right. If they were telling everyone those monkey pics were gonna make them rich, then yeah, that’s on them. But at the end of the day, it's just art, man. Just gotta roll with the punches and hope the SEC doesn’t come knocking on my digital door.

Unnormally2

[https://www.fidelity.com/etfs/crypto-funds-prospectus](https://www.fidelity.com/etfs/crypto-funds-prospectus) This is for FBTC. On page 2 it says: "The Trust, the Sponsor and the Trust’s service providers will not loan or pledge the Trust’s assets, nor will the Trust’s assets serve as collateral for any loan or similar arrangement. The Trust will not utilize leverage, derivatives or any similar arrangements in seeking to meet its investment objective." If they were to break anything in their prospectus, they would be in hot doo-doo with the SEC.

MiguelLancaster

the SEC...

InternationalGur4623

The SEC has targeted the largest NFT marketplace for unregistered securities trading, and the crypto community is outraged.

asdafari12

How were stonercats promoted as good investments and the SEC still went after them?

Every_Hunt_160

Funny thing is for whatever reason they sunset moons before avatars and a few months later SEC approved a Bitcoin ETF

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Sony Group's blockchain subsidiary launched the Minato testnet, aimed at enhancing Ethereum's layer 2 capabilities in partnership with Web3 company Startale. This initiative seeks to improve transaction speeds and reduce fees on Ethereum. The launch marks a significant development in the cryptocurrency sector, highlighting Sony's commitment to blockchain technology and its potential impact on Ethereum's scalability challenges. Concurrently, the article also touches on legal challenges faced by Telegram CEO Pavel Durov in France and regulatory scrutiny on platforms like OpenSea by the SEC. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

ImnotasuglyasIlook

Seems delusional. She only spoke a half hearted statement about "resetting the conversation with crypto" after her opponent started courting the industry. And then she didn't go to the BTC conference, ignored the crypto roundtable recently (I think there was like one representative from the administration there that had no authority and was in PR or something) and we are still seeing the SEC target crypto. She's been VP in an administration that's targeted crypto for 3 1/2 years. You have to be a halfwit to think she has changed her stance at all on crypto or plans to do anything other than continue to stifle it. I don't know how any pro crypto people could be foolish enough to donate funds to her. She's said the bare minimum lipservice, with no promises, necessary to try and avoid losing too many pro crypto voters.

corn-potage

naw, SEC already determined that it isn't with the ETH ETF approval!

TXTCLA55

The SEC is an independent body. You don't want the government bossing it around lol; that's how you crank corruption up to 11.

ccModBot

Thank you for submitting to /r/CryptoCurrency, Your post has been removed because there are already 2 posts about SEC in the top 50. You may post it again when the topic is no longer at the limit. ---[**Click here for a link to view the current limits**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/wiki/topic_limits)--- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the [moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcryptocurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The crypto community is organizing a $100,000 fundraiser for Vice President Kamala Harris, aiming to unite crypto donors and signal support despite industry skepticism about her potential approach to crypto regulation. The event, scheduled for September 13, seeks to raise at least $100,000 for Harris's campaign, with ticket prices ranging from $500 to $5,000. Organizers hope that, if elected, Harris will adopt a more favorable stance toward crypto, given the SEC’s strict approach under President Biden. The Harris campaign has been receptive towards crypto, meeting with leading firms and indicating support for emerging technologies. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

CMHNecron

The "friendliness" already started this year by the SEC. Nothing to suggest it would be any different come November either way.

glitter_my_dongle

What is said is not what is said. What he is really saying is "Hey SEC, I am going to speak out against you because my voter base appears to like crypto on social media and my data says that it will boost my votes while not decreasing others. So I am speaking out right now to get a boost come election time."

kirtash93

SEC doing something right? This is new!

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The SEC has charged Georgia brothers Jonathan and Tanner Adam with running a $60 million Ponzi scheme, falsely promising investors high returns through a non-existent crypto bot. The brothers allegedly spent $53.9 million of the raised funds on luxury items and misled investors about the risks and Jonathan's criminal background. The SEC seeks permanent injunctions, the return of investor funds, and civil penalties, having already secured emergency asset freezes for the brothers' companies. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

pierreman

SEC dropped the ball so hard on Madoff that they have been back peddling and attacking crypto to make up for it. Very sad. Was Gary appointed by Trump or just Powell?

Girthquaker9

So that means Wizards of the coast and Creatures Inc (Digital Magic Cards and Pokemon cards) are now securities and those companies need to be crushed? Lmao. Imagine a world were the SEC actually had investor interest and protected them instead of wasting money posturing on their nonsensical views. The concept of the internet was yet to be invented for decades when the Howie test was established...

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Democratic Congressman Wiley Nickel criticized the SEC's aggressive enforcement tactics against OpenSea, an NFT marketplace, calling it an abuse of power that undermines trust in the regulatory system. He urged the SEC to collaborate with Congress to establish clear regulations for digital assets and Web3 technologies. The criticism follows the SEC's threat to sue OpenSea, marking an expansion of its scrutiny into digital assets, specifically NFTs. Industry figures and pro-crypto groups also condemned the SEC's actions, arguing it oversteps its jurisdiction and hampers digital innovation. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

kirtash93

>The aggressive use of “regulation by enforcement” from @SECGov is a blatant abuse of power that erodes trust and transparency in our regulatory system. > >This heavy-handed approach creates widespread uncertainty and threatens to derail the progress driving digital innovation in the United States. > >The SEC should choose to work with Congress to craft clear, fair regulations through a collaborative and transparent process that includes public input. Only then can we build a regulatory framework for #Web3 that protects consumers and supports digital innovation - instead of crushing it. Its called manipulation and Gary should end in prison for it.

partymsl

Then actually do something against the SEC. All that is just talk, but no actions by those politicians.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; The U.S. House Financial Services Committee is planning a series of hearings in September to address various cryptocurrency issues. These hearings will cover topics such as decentralized finance (DeFi), the Securities and Exchange Commission's (SEC) oversight of digital assets, and the impact of 'pig butchering' scams. SEC Chair Gary Gensler is expected to testify before the committee. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

ccModBot

Thank you for submitting to /r/CryptoCurrency, Your post has been removed because there are already 2 posts about SEC in the top 50. You may post it again when the topic is no longer at the limit. ---[**Click here for a link to view the current limits**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/wiki/topic_limits)--- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the [moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcryptocurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*

JakeDonoghue

I think the way things are going, the likelihood is that regulation is going to make scams more common. I'm talking specifically of the vast resources that crypto firms are allocating to influencing the US election - this has already been affecting the regulatory landscape, notably with the FIT21 bill recently passing the House. This bill will classify most cryptos as commodities - something the industry is very keen on, as the CFTC is a smaller agency than the SEC with less resources and enforcement powers, and commodities are less stringently regulated. If classified as securities, tokens would have to undergo serious oversight throughout their launch processes - which are often the times when the most malpractice is committed, such as when founders and insiders dump tokens on new buyers, when teams set valuations and liquidity parameters themselves with no audits, etc. If politicians and regulators continue to take money from Fairshake and other PACs, it's likely that existing regulation will be trimmed down or abolished, and new regulation will come into effect which perpetuates or fails to tackle crypto scams. Worldcoin is an interesting example, because the regulatory issues it's been having are essentially the opposite of what many other projects encounter. Other projects fall foul of the law by not taking privacy seriously enough - for example, by not KYC'ing investors - whereas Worldcoin is in disputes with regulators for collecting too much of peoples' data, and therefore breeching GDPR and other data-privacy laws. I don't imagine many or any other projects will have this issue.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; UNFK, founded by Gunnar Lovelace, is a movement using pranks and memes to challenge banks and big corporations, aiming to promote positive change through social pressure. It gained attention with a stunt at the Consensus crypto conference and is now launching a web app to coordinate its 'agents' in various campaigns, including a meme competition targeting the SEC. Lovelace, with a history of activism and successful consumer brands, believes crypto can supercharge social movements and aims to harness its anti-establishment energy for impactful campaigns. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

wgcole01

SEC struggled to argue Beanie Babies aren’t securities: https://cointelegraph.com/news/sec-argues-beanie-babies-securities-coinbase-hearing-crypto-lawyers

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Despite market uncertainties and regulatory pressures from the SEC, venture capitalists remain bullish on the crypto sector, with ParaFi Capital and Lemniscap planning to invest a total of $190 million. ParaFi announced a $120 million fund focusing on diverse crypto assets, aiming to build a portfolio of 30 to 50 investments over the next few years. Lemniscap launched a $70 million fund targeting opportunities within the blockchain ecosystem. This investment trend persists even as funding has dropped 50% since March, reflecting continued VC interest in fostering crypto innovation despite challenges. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

hbsumo

The SEC is unbelievable. How are digital arts ever tagged securities? They are just clowning this time around

vancity-boi-in-tdot

"art", while I'm only a small fish in crypto, I laugh shit like this.  Although I admit I may be old and ignorant, I see them Jpegs with 0 established copyright  or trademark law as far as i can tell that are used primarily for money laundering until this can be proven otherwise. Crypto is a bit different. There is some utility (e.g. international transfers with low fees, block chain etc yet debatable over benefit over audited dbs) but the rhetoric is entirely facepalm worthy by some people a few years ago (slightly less so now). "It's going to end currency as we know it" "US dollar is dead", etc. It's clear like any security it is highly dependent on interest rates and the US fed now like any traditional security, when rates fall the price rises, when they rise the price falls, (as well as other macroeconomic factors) and so clearly dominated by the US dollar and the extension of USDT and USDC for support, that anyone that thinks it's going to replace the US dollar in this century at least is a complete idiot. (Same with the joke concept of BRICs, where authoritarian POS governments that don't even  trust their own citizens will somehow cede control and financial independence to other nations theyve historically never trusted (see: sino Soviet split, indo China war and border skirmishes). Add to wll traditional institutions adopted crypto, and it's clear as day it's a  security.  And tbf, like crypto, I'd rather nft be treated as a security because of the all of the scumbags involved, see: Luna, FTX, quadriga,  social media influencers, etc, who screwed little fish, and all thr money launderers involved especially for authoritarian pos government officials and international crime syndicates are held to account and little users aren't screwed. Say what you want about the SEC, but the last seismic  scandal they were involved in was 25+ with enron/Arthur Anderson scandal and they really got their shit together afterwards in terms of investor protection. 2008 crisis was on the big banks, fed, and fannie mae freddie mac, not sec.

dontblamemeivotedfor

Lot of that happening on SEC-regulated brokerages using options trading? Is the money laundering in the room with you now?

PandorasBucket

Expecting profit on something is the jurisdiction of the SEC. Anything.

coinfeeds-bot

tldr; Congressman Wiley Nickel criticized the SEC for its 'regulation by enforcement' approach towards the crypto industry, calling it a 'blatant abuse of power' that stifles innovation. He advocates for a collaborative process with Congress to create clear regulations, emphasizing the need for a balanced framework that protects consumers while supporting digital innovation. Nickel's comments come amid concerns over the SEC's handling of digital assets, including a Wells Notice to OpenSea for alleged securities violations, highlighting the broader debate on effective regulation without hindering technological progress. *This summary is auto generated by a bot and not meant to replace reading the original article. As always, DYOR.

PandorasBucket

We need to ask the SEC why we don't get a cut of the profit if reddit were to sell to some other company. Aren't our avatars securities?

ccModBot

Thank you for submitting to /r/CryptoCurrency, Your post has been removed because there are already 2 posts about SEC in the top 50. You may post it again when the topic is no longer at the limit. ---[**Click here for a link to view the current limits**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/wiki/topic_limits)--- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the [moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcryptocurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*

PandorasBucket

The SEC thinks their jurisdiction is anything that has an "expectation of profit now" and that seems to also be their working definition of a security. The only problem is that would including thousands of new categories of "things" including buying and selling old cars, baseball cards, those stupid gold coins on TV and so much more. It's so much easier to put it this way. When the organization that minted the thing gets sold do the people who bought the products get paid? No. They don't. They don't because they don't own the company. That is the true definition of a security they are not willing to admit because what they really want is jurisdiction power. All of these assets, even meme coins are actually just products. The organization (or person) creating these assets are not selling pieces of themselves. They are selling products that entitle the customer to no ownership rights in the organization that created them. This is a very simple concept actually. You can apply it as such: If the ethereum organization gets sold do ethereum holders get paid? No. If the Yuga Labs gets sold to Bored Ape Holders get paid from that sale? No. If whatever group manges Doge coin gets sold do Doge coin holders get paid from the proceeds? No. If you don't get paid when something is sold then you don't own it. If Disney were to sell it's company would the owners of all the Disney merchandise get paid? Of course not. Disney merchandise is not a stock. A stock is ownership in the company. Why is this so hard for them to get? I can only guess it's intentional corruption. They want to rent seek the industry for some elite group our of jealousy and greed, but crypto assets, unless stated otherwise are 99% of the time products, commodities and collectibles. They are independent of the companies that create them in the vast majority of cases and even if you advertise that these things will be more valuable in the future that STILL does not make them securities. If that were the case then all these coin and gold commercials on TV would be violating securities laws. The SEC's jurisdiction is not "Everyone who makes money." That is absurd.

MightbeGwen

To what? I’m a literal economist, with a degree and everything. Please explain. Stocks are put on the market as a way for corporations to get money. The idea being to put up a stake of ownership, people buy it, the company takes that money and does whatever they need it for. When the SEC instituted rule 10b-18 allowing stock buybacks (because they were illegal prior as it’s an obvious conflict of interest) it allowed corporations to buyback their own stock from the market. What happens when stocks get bought? Stock prices go up. So if all a corporation has to do to inflate their stock prices (and line go up is the drive for ALL boards) is issue stocks then rebuy them, and it will make the ceo and board wealthier as they get paid mostly in buybacks, why wouldn’t they? It’s a legal and sure fire way to increase stock prices. It would be stupid not to. They have little incentive to reinvest profits into the company. I can’t be the only person to notice that most brick and mortar stores are falling apart? The cvs I worked at 10 years ago literally has missing ceiling tiles and broken shelves. It looks like a hurricane went through there. It’s because they aren’t wasting money on the stores, just like they don’t waste money on the employees. It wouldn’t make sense when they can just inflate their value. Our entire economy is a bubble right now because so much money has been siphoned out of the economy and put into financial markets. The economy is slow because most of us have no money. It’s all up top. They were talking on NPR about how grocery prices are actually going to come down, when normally they just slow down, because sales dropped so bad. That’s how you know it’s corporate greed and not genuine inflation. If it was genuine they wouldn’t be able to afford to come down. Economics is about incentives. Whatever is incentivized people will do. Stock buybacks incentivized corporate psychopathy and that’s what we got.

ccModBot

Thank you for submitting to /r/CryptoCurrency, Your post has been removed because there are already 2 posts about SEC in the top 50. You may post it again when the topic is no longer at the limit. ---[**Click here for a link to view the current limits**](https://www.reddit.com/r/CryptoCurrency/wiki/topic_limits)--- *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the [moderators of this subreddit](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose?to=%2Fr%2Fcryptocurrency) if you have any questions or concerns.*

ClassicMembership685

So the SEC won't let you be Said you can't trade your security They tried to shut you down on OpenSea But it feels so empty without thee

Every_Hunt_160

If the SEC is saying that NFTs are a security, are they basically conceding that NFTs have real value?

Imeanttodothat10

Realistically, my solution would be to convince people to vote for people who believe in incrementally fixing the problems in our country instead of big feel good statements. I don't think the issue is solved with a single law. I think a myriad of policies would be good for the country as a whole and would all address the core issue of lack of ownership of the working class: 1) universal healthcare would decouple health coverage from employment giving workers less risk is pursuits. Many people, especially with kids, are unable to maximize their earnings because the risk of losing a safety net is too real. 2) some sort of national workers right policy. My personal favorite would be some sort of law tying Max and Min total compensation together. Ie; the highest paid employee can not make more than 300x the lowest. I think I would like to see some serious discussion of what options are available here in Congress. I have no idea why we allow our government to not actually discuss policy pros and cons daily. Teddy Roosevelt said no company should exist if it can't pay it's workers a living wage (which he clarified includes vacations and retirement savings), I agree. We need to go back to that. 3) giving the SEC, FEC actual teeth again. We need to go on a monopoly busting spree. Google, Amazon, Meta in particular own too much of the data space, which is the most important sector right now. The SEC also needs to be able to be able to actually go after obvious examples of wrong doing. 4) this one is largely unrelated to what you asked but is a personal pet peeve of mine- utilities (including Internet) need to be public services. The fact that we have for profit utilities is disgusting. Things that can not be gone without should not be for profit.

soliejordan

The SEC thinks anything digital is a security.

soliejordan

I remember the SEC sent me a letter for trading my Pokemon cards. Now I have digital Pokemon cards and they're sending me the same letter. Fortunately their just a commission or are they a federal agency like the Federal Reserve? I forget.

litifeta

Yes it is. All art is a security. It just happens to be a security the SEC does not usually monitor.

triddle0101

Wrong. The SEC doesnt think. They just scrounge for tax dollars to feed for the corruption hole.

NorskKiwi

When will the SEC charge Activision for WoW gold being sold on the black market?

emphasisx

The SEC is threatening to sue OpenSea, and you think an NFTs that earn profit is a good idea?

Brunosaurs4

SEC is... not thinking straight

inShambles3749

Oh no anyway. Like I care what the SEC does

RicoBelled

"NFTs are fundamentally creative goods: art, collectibles, video game items, domain names, event tickets, and more." you say. Are you serious? Even Tickets are "creative" goods? I think your phrase shows EXACTLY why putting ALL NFTS in one category misses the boat. I bet the SEC, and mind you, I'm not happy about it or supporting it, sees NFTs which give membership to a DAO, or ones that give returns as securities, and they do have a point there.

ThatChrisGuy7

With the SEC going after opensea any NFT related tokens may be going down

cryptolipto

The SEC thinks buying your art constitutes an investment of money with an expectation of profits from a common enterprise (you and your hands)

EstateOriginal2258

I'll consider the SEC's word once they start handing out rim jobs. Until then, they can get fucked.

Odlavso

These avatars are my retirement plan, SEC is really fucking me over here

Abdeliq

Please I hope not..... But if SEC finally win, I guess cancelling the avatar will be the only options left

Shiratori-3

It does feel a bit that way. And they do seem to be throwing a bunch of stuff out at the moment against all parts of ecosystem - wallets, defi, NFTS, etc, which I think everyone knew were on the list as part of the broader clampdown push. There's the international monitoring and tax stuff starting to happen ATM as well - which was flagged in the Whitehouse fact sheet on crypto etc the other year. Wonder if there's a dual timing element as well - there's only so much window before the elections, and iirc (unchecked suspicion) this isn't the first time that SEC have used the September market slump to make various pursuits public - they usually tend to coordinate and be quite deliberate about timings.

btc_clueless

Interesting. Are they making a last rushed push against crypto before the administration changes? It seems even Harris would have a more nuanced approach to crypto than Biden right now. Maybe the SEC is nervous, they lost a few lawsuits, BTC and ETH ETFs got approved and more might follow. It seems like the floodgates to crypto have begun to open and with it will come not just legitimate stuff but also a whole bunch of crap. Perhaps their goal is to simply stall crypto for a little longer but they must know, it's a losing battle in the long run.