Outside Source
The SEC alleges Kraken is operating an unregistered securities exchange.
News
Own this piece of crypto history
A United States federal court denied crypto exchange Kraken’s motion to dismiss a Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) lawsuit alleging Kraken is operating an unregistered securities exchange, according to an Aug. 23 court filing.
In November, the SEC charged Kraken with “operating Kraken’s crypto trading platform as an unregistered securities exchange, broker, dealer, and clearing agency.”
“[T]he SEC has plausibly alleged that at least some of the cryptocurrency transactions that Kraken facilitates on its network constitute investment contracts, and therefore securities, and are accordingly subject to securities laws,” according to the opinion of the US District Court in Northern California.
Kraken’s exchange supports dozens of cryptocurrencies. Source: Kraken
Related: Coinbase has 70% chance of full dismissal in SEC lawsuit — Litigation analyst
The ruling is a setback in the industry’s ongoing tussle with the SEC to define which cryptocurrencies, if any, qualify as “securities” under US law and therefore fall under the SEC’s jurisdiction.
Coinbase is embroiled in a similar battle with the SEC over whether its virtual asset staking products constitute an unlawful securities offering. In August, the SEC reportedly rejected an application from securities exchange Cboe Global Markets to list Solana (SOL) exchange-traded funds (ETFs) on grounds that SOL is a security.
According to the SEC’s complaint, “Kraken’s alleged failure to register these functions has deprived investors of significant protections, including inspection by the SEC, recordkeeping requirements, and safeguards against conflicts of interest, among others.”
The Aug. 23 ruling asserts an expansive definition of what constitutes a “security” by looking not only at any formal investment contracts but also at the broader context around which the instruments — in this case, virtual assets — were marketed and sold.
“[C]ontractual formalities are not required for something to qualify as an investment contract, and therefore a security,” the court said. “What counts is the totality of the circumstances surrounding a sale, trade, or exchange, and the expectations of the investor.”
To deny the motion to dismiss the suit, the court only had to conclude that the SEC’s claims are plausible. A final ruling has yet to be made.
Magazine: AI drone ‘hellscape’ plan for Taiwan, LLMs too dumb to destroy humanity: AI Eye
This article first appeared at Cointelegraph.com News
