{"id":41105,"date":"2024-03-21T07:43:21","date_gmt":"2024-03-21T07:43:21","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/coingrafter.com\/index.php\/2024\/03\/21\/ex-cftc-commissioner-calls-secs-approach-on-eth-illegal\/"},"modified":"2024-03-21T07:43:22","modified_gmt":"2024-03-21T07:43:22","slug":"ex-cftc-commissioner-calls-secs-approach-on-eth-illegal","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/coingrafter.com\/index.php\/2024\/03\/21\/ex-cftc-commissioner-calls-secs-approach-on-eth-illegal\/","title":{"rendered":"Ex-CFTC Commissioner Calls SEC’s Approach On ETH “Illegal”"},"content":{"rendered":"

[ad_1]
\n<\/p>\n

\n

Former Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) commissioner Brian Quintenz has criticized the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)\u2019s stance on Ethereum (ETH)<\/a>. He labeled the SEC\u2019s method towards ETH as as \u201cillegal\u201d and raised issues over potential regulatory confusion.<\/p>\n

Ex-CFTC Commissioner Provides Clarity On Ethereum Classification<\/h2>\n

In a thread on X, Quintenz\u2019s critique spotlighted the SEC\u2019s approval of Ethereum futures ETFs on regulated safety exchanges in October 2023. In addition, he emphasised that the SEC\u2019s determination implicitly acknowledged Ethereum\u2019s standing as a non-security and outdoors its jurisdiction. He acknowledged, \u201cWhen the SEC allowed ETH Futures ETFs to trade on its regulated security exchanges, it explicitly acknowledged the status of the underlying, ETH, as being a non-security and outside of its jurisdiction.\u201d<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

According to Quintenz, the approval of Ethereum ETFs by the SEC, submit Ethereum\u2019s transition to proof-of-stake (PoS) consensus mechanism in September 2022, means that the SEC thought of Ethereum to not be a safety on the time. He argued, \u201cIf the SEC had any doubt about the regulatory treatment of ETH in Oct 2023, it wouldn\u2019t have approved the ETF.\u201d<\/p>\n

Furthermore, the previous CFTC<\/a> commissioner contended that if Ethereum had been deemed a safety, the futures contracts listed by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) could be \u201cillegal.\u201d He famous, \u201cIf ETH were in fact a security, then the CFTC-listed futures contracts (on which the ETFs were based) would be illegal.\u201d He additionally asserted, \u201cMoreover, if ETH were a security, then the ETH Futures ETF would be an illegal instrument.\u201d<\/p>\n

In addition, Quintenz criticized the SEC for inflicting \u201cconfusion and harming the public\u201d by refusing to acknowledge these info. He expressed issues about potential delays or denials of Ethereum ETFs by the SEC, questioning the company\u2019s justification given its prior acknowledgment of Ethereum\u2019s standing as outdoors its jurisdiction.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

The above-mentioned issues stem from Prometheum\u2019s request to supply custody providers for Ethereum as a safety. The SEC is but to decide on the matter but it surely has confronted stern contradiction from the CFTC.<\/p>\n

Also Read:\u00a0Breaking: Ethereum Foundation Under Investigation By A State Authority<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

Quintenz Responds To Regulatory Concerns<\/h2>\n

Moreover, an X person\u2019s concern echoed broader sentiments inside the cryptocurrency neighborhood concerning the SEC\u2019s method to regulating digital belongings. The person\u2019s inquiry delved into the intricacies of how regulators just like the SEC may method Ethereum\u2019s classification<\/a>, notably in relation to its potential as a commodity and a safety.<\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

Responding to Quintenz\u2019s submit on X, the person questioned, \u201cHow would you respond to their argument that it was an acknowledgment of its commodity status (and therefore the legality of a CFTC regulated futures based product), but not the non-security status of the underlying?\u201d Moreover, additionally they speculated on the SEC\u2019s techniques in courtroom battles and the potential implications for the business.<\/p>\n

In response to this intriguingly query, Quintenz provided a easy but robust reply. He asserted, \u201cAs I showed in the thread, a commodity is deemed to be a non-security if there is a CFTC-regulated futures or swaps contract on it.\u201d Moreover, Quintenz\u2019s response underscored the importance of regulatory oversight.<\/p>\n

Also Read:\u00a0How BlackRock\u2019s Launch Of A Yield-Bearing Stablecoin On Ethereum Is A Game-Changer<\/a><\/strong><\/p>\n

<\/p>\n

\n
\n

\u2713 Share:<\/p>\n

<\/a><\/p>\n

\n
\n \"coingape\"
\n<\/a>\n <\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

<\/p>\n

\n
\n
\n
\n
\n<\/p>\n

CoinGape contains an skilled staff of native content material writers and editors working around the clock to cowl information globally and current information as a reality slightly than an opinion. CoinGape writers and reporters contributed to this text. <\/p>\n<\/p><\/div>\n

\n \"\"