The U.S. Exchange Commission is suing Kraken for cryptocurrency, but this looks like a version of a lost lawsuit.
The legal showdown between the U.S. Securities and Exchange (SEC) and leading crypto exchange Kraken looks like yet another misleading attempt by the SEC to exert control over an industry that fundamentally challenges outdated regulatory manuals. The agency filed a lawsuit in November accusing Kraken of operating as an unregistered **exchange.
This lawsuit is not just a repetition of past failures by the U.S. Exchange Commission. It's also a clear example of overregulation that fails to capture the essence of cryptocurrency. It mirrors the agency's actions against Coinbase, which marks an aggressive regulatory model that is both ineffective and counterproductive. In the case against Coinbase, the U.S. Exchange Commission's allegations similarly involve operating as an unregistered exchange. This approach fundamentally misunderstands the essence of cryptocurrency trading.
This lawsuit is not just a repetition of past failures by the U.S. Exchange Commission. It's also a clear example of overregulation that fails to capture the essence of cryptocurrency. It mirrors the agency's actions against Coinbase, which marks an aggressive regulatory model that is both ineffective and counterproductive. In the case against Coinbase, the U.S. Exchange Commission's allegations similarly involve operating as an unregistered exchange. This approach fundamentally misunderstands the essence of cryptocurrency trading.
Unlike traditional exchanges, platforms such as Kraken offer a variety of digital assets, but these assets don't fit perfectly into the framework. This misclassification by the U.S. Exchange Commission reveals a lack of understanding of the unique characteristics of cryptocurrencies, which, as decentralized assets, often have utility or currency-like characteristics rather than traditional.
The SEC's lawsuit against Kraken has humiliated the exchange because the exchange has told users that they can try to make a profit by dollar-cost averaging of Solana. Source: U.S. Exchange Commission.
One of the most striking issues is the lack of technology neutrality – the regulatory framework should apply equally to all forms of technology, without favoritism or penalties for any particular technology. By forcibly incorporating cryptocurrencies into the traditional model, the U.S. Exchange Commission has not only misapplied the law, but has also shown a clear bias towards digital assets. The lack of neutrality not only hinders innovation, but also unfairly targets platforms that strive to operate in a regulatory environment.
The aggressive stance of the U.S. Exchange Commission could lead to a shift in business from the U.S. to more crypto-friendly jurisdictions. This phenomenon, known as regulatory arbitrage, could lead to the loss of the United States as a leader in technological innovation. The crypto industry is global, and over-regulation in one country will only force businesses to relocate, taking away their economic benefits and innovations.
The Kraken lawsuit will be another example of the SEC's failure to successfully regulate the cryptocurrency industry, similar to the outcome of its actions against Coinbase. This repeated cycle of aggressive and misleading regulation is not only futile, but it also damages the credibility of the SEC. It conveys the message that regulators are more interested in demonstrating their regulatory power than in understanding and adapting to new technological paradigms.
This case is more than just an isolated legal dispute. This suggests a broader problem with how cryptocurrencies are handled in the U.S. regulatory framework. The SEC must move beyond the current outdated tactics and engage the crypto industry in a more informed and constructive way. Regulation is necessary, but it must be reasonable, well-informed, and designed to promote innovation, not stifle it.
It looks like the US ** Trading Commission will fail miserably again, which will once again remind people that regulators need to take a new approach.