Crypto Regulation

Internal documents reveal Australia’s potential timeline for crypto legislation: Report

Internal documents from the Australian Treasury Department have revealed crypto legislation in the country could be a year away at the very least.

Crypto legislation in Australia could be dragged out past 2024 and beyond, with the government seemingly wanting to take its time in order to get a full picture of the industry, internal documents from the government have revealed. 

The documents, obtained by The Australian Financial Review under freedom of information laws, reportedly reveal that the government aims to release consultation papers in the second quarter of 2023 and will hold stakeholder roundtables on crypto licensing and custody in the third quarter.

The industry has been waiting to see the next steps of the Australian Labor government’s token mapping exercise, which was announced three months after it came into power last year, with submissions closed on March 3.

However, according to the documents, final submissions to the cabinet are not expected until late in the year, possibly dragging out any decisions on crypto legislation well into 2024 and beyond.

One briefing from the department has also reportedly acknowledged that they expect frustration from crypto businesses and consumer groups over the long timetable.

“Treasury expects some stakeholders to be disappointed with the perceived delay in implementing a licensing regime,” according to a brief from Australian Treasurer Jim Chalmers, seen by AFR. 

“For example, consumer groups seeking immediate protections and businesses seeking regulatory legitimacy.”

However, the Treasury believes that in the wake of FTX’s collapse, the demand for cryptocurrencies has “weakened significantly,” which could give it more time to hash out regulations.

“Treasury considers these concerns are somewhat mitigated by the current market conditions resulting in less consumer demand for crypto assets; and the need to complete the token mapping exercise to provide clarity on how any new licensing framework would operate in practice.”

Related: Australia bolsters crypto watchdogs in ‘multi-stage’ plan to fight scams

Meanwhile, the government has also revealed through the documents that it has created a dedicated “crypto policy unit” within the Treasury department.

In a meeting with treasury last November, the crypto policy unit reportedly flagged possible requirements for crypto licenses, including “fit and proper person” tests, capital requirements and obligations to report bad actors and scams in the industry. The unit also discussed beefing up consumer protections.

Last year, a survey from Australian crypto exchange Swyftx revealed in September that approximately one million Australians planned to purchase cryptocurrency for the first time over the next 12 months, bringing total crypto ownership in the country to over five million.

According to Swyftx, 4.2 million Australians own crypto, with more planning to buy some over the next year. Source: Annual Australian Crypto Survey, Swyftx

Crypto lawyers flame Gensler over claims that all crypto are securities

Crypto lawyers weighed in on Gary Gensler’s crypto regulation claims, saying that the the Securities and Exchange Commission has no legal standing to police the space.

Cryptocurrency lawyers have rebuffed comments made by the head of the United States securities regulator, who claimed in a recent interview that every cryptocurrency except Bitcoin (BTC) is a security that falls under its jurisdiction.

In a wide-ranging Feb. 23 New York Magazine interview discussing crypto, Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Gary Gensler claimed “everything other than Bitcoin” falls under the agency’s remit.

He added other crypto projects “are securities because there’s a group in the middle and the public is anticipating profits based on that group,” which he said is not the case with Bitcoin.

Jake Chervinsky, a lawyer and policy lead at the crypto advocacy group the Blockchain Association, argued however in a Feb. 26 tweet that Gensler’s “opinion is not the law” despite his claimed command over the crypto sector.

He added “until and unless” the SEC “proves its case in court” for its jurisdiction over each individual token “one at a time” then it “lacks authority to regulate any of them.”

Lawyer Logan Bolinger also chimed in, tweeting on Feb. 26 “that Gensler’s opinions on what is or isn’t a security are not legally dispositive” — meaning it’s not the final legal determination.

“Judges — not SEC chairs — ultimately determine what the law means and how it applies,” Bolinger added.

The policy lead at advocacy body Bitcoin Policy Institute, Jason Brett, said Gensler’s comments “shouldn’t be celebrated, but feared” and stated, “there are ways to win other than via a regulatory moat.”

SEC needs 12,305 lawsuits: Delphi Labs counsel

Meanwhile, Gabriel Shapiro, the general counsel at investment firm Delphi Labs, outlined in a series of tweets the seemingly impossible enforcement that the SEC would have to carry out on the industry to cement its rule.

Shapiro said that over 12,300 tokens worth around $663 billion are — according to Gensler — unregistered securities that are illegal in the U.S. and, as mentioned by Chervinsky, the agency would have to file a lawsuit against each token creator.

Related: Emojis count as financial advice and have legal consequences, judge rules

The SEC has handled crypto in two main ways, according to Shapiro: Either fining token creators and requiring the issuer to register, or fining them and ordering the created tokens to be destroyed and delisted from exchanges.

“SEC registration is not only too expensive for most token creators — there is also no clear path for registration of tokens,” Shapiro said, adding:

“What is the plan here? Since registration is not feasible, it can only be [that] everyone pays huge fines, stops working on the protocols, destroys all dev premines, and delists [tokens] from trading. That would mean 12,305 lawsuits.”

“What is the plan? We are all wondering, and billions of American [dollars] are at risk.”

Stablecoins not the target in BUSD crackdown: Matrixport head of research

Crypto financial service Matrixport’s head of research believes regulators are not targeting all stablecoins with the regulatory crackdown on BUSD issuer Paxos.

Crypto financial services Matrixport’s head of research believes the recent scrutiny of Paxos and its Binance USD (BUSD) token is not a direct attack on stablecoins themselves. 

In a Feb. 14 analysis, Matrixport’s Markus Thielen suggested that BUSD issuer Paxos Trust Company may not have been stringent enough with its oversight of the token.

He added that the issue “does not appear to be around stablecoins” in itself.

“Paxos had violated its obligation to conduct tailored, periodic risk assessment and due diligence of Binance and Paxos-issued BUSD customers,” Thielen argued.

On Feb. 13, the New York Department of Financial Services (NYDFS) ordered Paxos to halt the issuance of BUSD “as a result of several unresolved issues related to Paxos’ oversight of its relationship with Binance.”

Paxos also recently confirmed that on Feb. 3, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) sent a Wells notice to the stablecoin issuer over its alleged failure to register the offering under federal securities laws.

Thielen notes that BUSD has issued $11 billion on Ethereum, but there’s also $4.8 billion of Binance-Peg BUSD Token on BNB Smart Chain. Binance provides a pegged token service in which BUSD is locked on Ethereum and Binance-Peg BUSD is issued on BNB Chain and other blockchains such as Avalanche and Polygon.

“It appears that NYDFS is now worried that the $4.8 billion might not be properly backed or have had issues with being 1:1 backed,” he said.

However,Paxos has stated as recently as Feb. 13, that, “BUSD tokens issued by Paxos Trust have and always will be backed 1:1 with US dollar-denominated reserves, fully segregated and held in bankruptcy remote accounts.” 

In a statement to Cointelegraph, Binance reiterated this stance, saying, “BUSD is a 1 to 1 backed stablecoin that is one of the most transparent stablecoins in existence.”

Thielen notes some of the regulatory actions could have also been sparked by the Jan. 24 incident when Binance mixed customer funds with collateral.

The recent actions against BUSD have still caused some to believe that other stablecoins could be in trouble.

Paxos recently stated that besides the current issue around BUSD, “there are unequivocally no other allegations against Paxos.”

Meanwhile, USD Coin (USDC) issuer Circle’s chief strategy officer and head of global policy, Dante Disparte, told Cointelegraph:

“Circle maintains that USDC is a regulated dollar digital currency issued as stored value under U.S. money transmission law.”

“Facts and circumstances in any type of regulatory action like this are all different, as are the structural and regulatory considerations with each of the cryptocurrencies that are in circulation around the world,” Disparte added.

Related: Paxos ‘categorically disagrees’ with the SEC that BUSD is a security

Thielen has however urged the industry not to be overly concerned about the future of BUSD.

“Binance has shot itself a little bit in the foot here, but they are working on it and it should be resolved. So should we be really worried?” Thielen said.

“I don’t think so. Is the peg breaking? NO. We are no longer in a bear market where you worry about downside, in bull markets, you focus on the upside,” he added.

Crypto firms could face 2 years jail for breaching UK advertising laws

Crypto firms in the United Kingdom could face some harsh punishments under the FCA’s proposed financial promotions regime.

Newly proposed advertising rules in the United Kingdom could potentially see executives of crypto firms face up to two years of prison for failing to meet certain requirements around promotion, according to the United Kingdom’s financial watchdog. 

In a Feb. 6 statement, the U.K. Financial Conduct Authority revealed that if the proposed “financial promotions regime” is approved by Parliament, all crypto firms in the country and overseas would have to follow certain requirements when advertising their crypto services to U.K. customers.

“Cryptoasset businesses marketing to UK consumers, including firms based overseas, must get ready for this regime,” said the FCA.

“Acting now will help ensure they can continue to legally promote to U.K. consumers. We encourage firms to take all necessary advice as part of their preparations,” it added.

Under the FCA’s proposed regime, crypto firms would need to either have authorization from the FCA to advertise their services or have an exemption under the Financial Promotion Order.

According to the regulator, there are only four routes under which a “cryptoasset business” can promote its services to customers in the United Kingdom: 

  1. The promotion is communicated by an FCA-authorised person.
  2. The promotion is made by an unauthorized person but approved by an FCA-authorized person. Legislation is currently making its way through Parliament that, if passed, would introduce a regulatory gateway that authorized firms will need to pass through in order to approve financial promotions for unauthorized persons.
  3. The promotion is communicated by a crypto asset business registered with the FCA under the Money Laundering, Terrorist Financing and Transfer of Funds (Information on the Payer) Regulations 2017.
  4. The promotion otherwise complies with the conditions of an exemption in the Financial Promotion Order.

The regulator said that any promotion made outside of these routes will be in breach of the Financial Services and Markets Act 2000 (FSMA), which carries a criminal punishment of up to two years of imprisonment.

“We will take robust action where we see firms promoting cryptoassets to UK consumers in breach of the requirements of the financial promotions regime,” the FCA said.

Related: British authorities split on banning sale of crypto investment products

Other than potential prison time for its execs, firms caught violating the new regime could face having their website taken down, public warnings and other enforcement actions.

At this stage, the FCA has said they will await the “relevant legislation” to publish “our final rules for crypto asset promotions,” possibly indicating the financial promotions regime could see updates or changes.

“Subject to any changes in circumstances, we expect to take a consistent approach to crypto assets to that taken in our new rules, in place from Feb. 1 2023, for other high-risk investments,” the FCA said.

Crypto needs ‘adult supervision’ and turmoil to ‘grow up’ — MicroStrategy co-founder

The bankruptcies of once high-profile crypto players are “painful” but helpful, according to Michael Saylor, but industry oversight is still needed.

High-profile crypto bankruptcies and a hearty price crash are necessary evils to help the industry grow, while greater regulation is a must, according to MicroStrategy co-founder Michael Saylor.

In a Feb. 3 interview on CNBC’s Squawk on the Street, Saylor opined on potential incoming United States crypto regulation after the bankruptcy of FTX, saying:

“The crypto meltdown was painful in the short term, but it’s necessary over the long term for the industry to grow up.”

He added the industry “has some good ideas” — implying one was Bitcoin (BTC) Lightning Network — but added some in the space “implemented those good ideas in an irresponsible fashion.”

Saylor said the crypto space needs direction from entities long-involved in the traditional financial markets and input from regulators — in particular the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).

“What [the industry] needs is adult supervision. It needs the Goldman Sachs and the Morgan Stanleys and the BlackRocks to come into the industry. It needs clear guidelines from Congress. It needs clear rules of the road from the SEC.”

This “meltdown,” according to Saylor, educated many on crypto while simultaneously revealing that it’s “time for the world to provide a constructive, transparent framework for digital assets” so the financial system can move “into the 21st century.”

Saylor on Munger’s crypto criticism

Saylor also responded to criticisms leveled by Charlie Munger, the vice chair of insurance and investment firm Berkshire Hathaway, saying the 99-year-old investment veteran should take time to study Bitcoin.

On Feb. 1, Munger opined that crypto is “not a currency, not a commodity and not a security” instead calling it “gambling” and arguing that the U.S. should “obviously” bring in laws to ban crypto.

Related: Film review: ‘Human B’ shows a personal journey with Bitcoin

Saylor agreed Munger’s crypto-criticism wasn’t “totally off” but there are “10,000 crypto tokens which aren’t gambling,” adding:

“Charlie and the other critics, they’re members of the Western elite and they’re continually prodded for an opinion on Bitcoin and they haven’t had the time to study it.”

He added if Munger “spent 100 hours studying” Bitcoin then “he would be more bullish on Bitcoin than I am.”

Saylor pointed to emerging markets such as Lebanon, Argentina and Nigeria which have high crypto-use rates and use cases spanning from inflation hedging to remittances.

“I’ve never really met someone […] that spent some time to think about it that wasn’t enthusiastic about Bitcoin.”

Former SEC chief blasts ‘bogus’ catchphrase: ‘Regulation by enforcement’

Lawyer and former SEC official John Reed Stark came out in defense of the SEC’s enforcement efforts in the crypto space.

A former Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) official has slammed “cryptocurrency lobbyists” for labeling SEC enforcement actions as “regulation by enforcement” — calling the term a “Bogus Big Crypto Catch Phrase.”

John Reed Stark, a former chief of the SEC’s Office of Internet Enforcement and a crypto skeptic, opined in a Jan. 22 post that the argument is “sorely misguided” as it was just how securities regulations worked.

“Litigation and SEC enforcement are actually how securities regulation works,” he argued. “The flexibility of SEC statutory weaponry is an SEC hallmark, enabling SEC enforcement to keep fraud in check.”

“In fact, the repetitive chorus of RBE [regulation by enforcement] is not only a misguided, deflective effort designed to tap into sympathetic libertarian and anti-regulatory mores – it’s also utter nonsense.”

According to Stark, when the SEC Office of Internet Enforcement was created in 1998, there were critics who said SEC regulations were too vague and regulation by enforcement would stifle the growth of the Internet.

“In hindsight, relying upon the flexibility of securities regulation to police the Internet cleared out the more egregious instances of early online securities fraud,” he argued.

“Moreover, vigorous online SEC enforcement efforts also paved the way for legitimate technological innovations to flourish, rendering markets more efficient and transparent, thereby allowing investors more opportunities for success,” he said.

Over the last few years, the SEC has launched more than a few high-profile cases against crypto companies such as Ripple and LBRY, prompting some critics to argue the SEC has been using enforcement actions to develop the law on a case-by-case basis rather than creating clear regulations. 

Ripple General Counsel Stuart Alderoty has also questioned the approach in a Nov. 28 post, citing the high-profile collapse of FTX and the related contagion that claimed BlockFi as evidence it doesn’t work.

In Stark’s opinion, however, the SEC is following the law with its actions — and he cited legal victories where courts have found in its favor.

“Indeed, courts have upheld a broad array of SEC cases involving crypto-related offerings. In fact, in the 127 crypto-related enforcement actions already filed by the SEC, the SEC has not lost a single case,” Stark said.

“The SEC’s approach is rarely improperly expansive, nor does it involve rogue SEC enforcement efforts.”

“Rather, the SEC typically adopts a reasoned, common sense application of the basic requirements of the federal securities laws to new and evolving market conditions and technologies,” he added.

Timothy Cradle, a former Celsius employee and the current director of regulatory affairs at the Blockchain Intelligence Group, replied to Stark’s post, questioning whether clear regulations would ultimately be a better policy than regulation by enforcement.

“I agree with the argument, however, would it be too much to ask that the SEC and CFTC issue guidance much in the same way FinCEN did in 2019?” he said.

“If big crypto is saying it needs clear rules of the road, wouldn’t it make sense for the regulators to clarify in an official communication, such as guidance, that their rules do apply to cryptocurrencies?” Cradle added.

Related: CFTC slammed for ‘blatant regulation by enforcement’ over Ooki DAO case

Chris Hayes, a former advisory board member for the PA [Pennsylvania] Blockchain Coalition, also commented, arguing that a “sensible regulatory approach would be for the SEC to issue a request for comment on how digital assets might not be able to meet the registration obligations due to their digital nature on blockchain.”

“Take that information and then propose a rule on how these tokens can comply under the 33 act, taking into account the technological differences that impact custody, secondary sales and settlement time/structure in comparison to traditional securities.”

Swyftx to chop its ‘Earn’ program this week, citing murky regulations

Australian crypto exchange Swyftx has decided to close its Earn program due to a lack of clarity around crypto products regulation.

Australian crypto exchange Swyftx is set to shutter its crypto-interest product this week, citing a “constantly changing regulatory landscape” for crypto products in the country. 

From Jan. 10, the crypto exchange will cease to operate the “Earn” program, with users having their entire Earn balances returned to their trade wallets.

Swyftx said while the decision might be “disappointing” for users, it is “committed to doing what is best for the program in the near term.”

“While we believe in the value and potential of cryptocurrency, what we currently need is greater clarity on the regulation of crypto offerings such as Earn.”

The announcement was posted by Swyftx on Dec. 27 but went largely unnoticed at the time given the holidays. 

The news comes just weeks after Australian regulators launched actions against fintech firm Block Earner as well as Finder.com’s crypto yield products for allegedly being offered without the required licensing.

Swyftx has not permanently closed the door on Earn though, with the exchange saying it would consider re-opening the program once the rules are more straightforward.

In a statement to Cointelegraph, Swyftx said it was closing its Earn offering due to “uncertainty of the current regulatory context.”

“We hope to reopen it once we have settled rules in place in Australia around interest-yielding crypto offerings.  In the meantime, our priority is to continue to positively engage with regulators and the government to protect existing and future Aussie crypto users,” it added. 

First launched in May, Swyftx’s Earn program allowed users to earn daily interest on certain crypto tokens by loaning them to Swyftx.

Related: Superhero cans merger with Swyftx, citing regulatory scrutiny

The Australian Securities & Investments Commission has been actively eyeing down Australian crypto product providers in recent months.

In addition to the actions against Block Earner and Finder.com in November and December, it also took action against the creators of the Qoin token in October last year for “misleading” representations of its token.

The Australian federal government has also stepped up efforts to regulate the crypto sector. 

In December, the Australian Labor Government announced it would release a consultation paper in early 2023 as part of its token mapping initiative.

Australian Treasurer Jim Chalmers said the consultation paper would cover how certain crypto assets should be regulated alongside frameworks for company licensing, asset custody and consumer protections.

Update Dec. 9, 6:22am UTC: Added a statement from Swyftx.

Crypto could spark the next financial crisis, says India’s RBI head

Reserve Bank of India Governor Shaktikanta Das warned that if crypto becomes regulated and is allowed to grow, it could cause the next financial meltdown.

The governor of the Reserve Bank of India (RBI), Shaktikanta Das, did not mince his words when discussing the crypto sector at a recent conference, asserting that “private” crypto will be behind the next financial crisis.

Speaking at the Business Standard BFSI Insight Summit on Dec. 21, Das argued that private cryptocurrencies — those that are not issued by banks or governments — are backed by nothing and are purely tools for speculation.

“They have no underlying value. They have huge inherent risks for our macroeconomic and financial stability. I am yet to hear any credible argument about what public good or what public purpose it serves,” he said.

Shaktikanta Das speaking at the summit. Source: Kamlesh Pednekar

Adding to those sentiments, Das went on to suggest that a full-scale crypto ban in India would be the best approach moving forward:

“It [private cryptocurrency trade] is a hundred percent speculative activity, and I would still hold the view that it should be prohibited … because, if it is allowed to grow, if you try to regulate it and allow it to grow, please mark my words, the next financial crisis will come from private cryptocurrencies.”

Highlighting examples of such risk, the RBI head pointed to the recent FTX implosion led by the freshly extradited Sam Bankman Fried.

“I don’t think we need to say anything more about our stand after the developments over the last one year, including the latest episode around FTX,” he said.

Such comments mark another instance in which a key figure in politics or finance has blamed the crypto sector for FTX’s collapse, with many U.S. senators in particular taking the chance to slam digital assets over the past few weeks.

Das, of course, spoke in much more favorable terms of central bank digital currencies, emphasizing that the RBI is actively pushing to get its digital rupee off the ground.

“You will see in days to come more and more central banks will embrace digital currencies and India has been in the forefront of the digital revolution in the current century,” he said.

The RBI has historically had a frosty view on crypto and questioned its value on several occasions. Das’ latest comments show that the sentiment is only getting worse, as the bank had previously ranked the sector at the bottom of its list of systemic risks as recently as June.

Rep. Tom Emmer mulls bringing back bill aimed at reducing crypto red tape

Tom Emmer is considering reintroducing a bill that removes the requirement for entities to be registered as money transmitters even if they don’t handle customer assets.

Crypto-friendly Congressman Tom Emmer is considering re-floating a bipartisan bill that would lift the requirement for certain crypto businesses and projects to register as Virtual Asset Service Providers (VASPs) in the wake of the FTX collapse. 

The bill titled “Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act” was led by Republican Emmer and Democratic Congressman Darren Soto. It was tabled during the 117th Congress on Aug. 17, 2021, and did not make it any further down the line.

Emmer may be liking his chances a bit more the second time around, given the current climate in which the U.S. government is scrambling to get regulation off the ground to prevent another FTX-style disaster.

Tweeting on Dec. 15, Emmer noted that it’s “probably a good time” to re-introduce the bill, adding that:

“The bill asserts that blockchain entities that never custody consumer funds are not money transmitters… providing necessary legal certainty to ensure the future of crypto reflects American values.”

The bill itself aims to set out guidelines that remove certain hurdles and requirements for “blockchain developers and service providers” such as miners, multi-signature service providers and decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms.

It was put forward in response to a June 2021 draft guidance from the Financial Action Task Force (FATF) that would have expanded the definition of virtual asset services providers to include “any provider that may develop or operate a DeFi platform, even if they have no interaction with users.”

While a number of U.S. politicians attacked crypto at the House Financial Services Committee hearing on FTX’s collapse this week, Emmer has notably praised the crypto community for using blockchain tech to uncover key info on the firm’s operations.

Bills, bills everywhere

On the other end of the political spectrum, crypto-skeptic Senator Elizabeth Warren introduced the Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2022 on Dec. 14, alongside Senator Roger Marshall.

The bill essentially seeks to stop financial institutions from using privacy tools such as crypto mixers and mandate crypto firms to follow the same money-laundering rules as banks, a well as regulating crypto kiosks (ATMs).

Related: US senator calls on SEC’s Gensler to answer for ‘regulatory failures’

It would also require miners, custodial and self-custodial wallet providers to implement Know Your Customer (KYC) controls.

Senator Cynthia Lummis, a known hodler and Bitcoin proponent, has of course criticized the bill, arguing that such KYC requirements won’t work within the context of crypto.

On Dec. 14, Lummis herself also outlined that she intends to re-introduce a bill that would hand over most authority over crypto to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), as opposed to the Securities and Exchange Commission, which Warren among others are pushing for.

Crypto will be regulated as securities — ICE boss and Senator Warren

Senator Elizabeth Warren’s bill seeks to hand control to the SEC, imposing new obligations on centralized crypto firms, something Jeffrey Sprecher thinks will be good for crypto.

Most cryptocurrencies are likely to be regulated as securities in the United States, according to the CEO of Intercontinental Exchange Inc (ICE), Jeffrey Sprecher and Senator Elizabeth Warren.

The renewed focus on regulating cryptocurrencies as securities comes in light of FTX’s recent implosion, which wiped countless billions from the market, put consumer funds in limbo and soured crypto’s reputation among regulators and officials.

Speaking on Dec. 6 at the financial services conference by Goldman Sachs Group Inc, Sprecher — whose ICE operates the New York Stock Exchange — confidently stated crypto assets are “going to be regulated and dealt like securities.”

He argued this will ultimately result in far greater consumer protections and regulatory oversight of centralized exchanges and brokers:

“What does that mean? It means more transparency, it means segregated client funds, the role of the broker as a broker-dealer will be overseeing and the exchanges will be separated from the brokers. The settlement and clearing will be separated from the exchanges.”

Sprecher also argued new regulation was not necessarily required for crypto as the legal frameworks are already there in terms of securities and they are “just going to be implemented more strongly.”

Senator Warren wants to crack the whip

Crypto skeptic Senator Elizabeth Warren is working on a crypto bill that would reportedly give the Gary Gensler-led Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) most of the regulatory authority over the crypto space.

According to a Dec. 7 report from online news outlet Semafor, which cited two unnamed sources close to the matter, Warren’s crypto bill is still in its early stages but aims to cover a host of issues including taxation, regulation, national security and climate.

Warren is said to be looking to impose regulatory obligations such as audited financial statements and bank-like capital requirements in particular.

While specific details on the bill weren’t disclosed, Alex Sarabia, a spokesperson for Warren, confirmed with Semafor the senator is looking toward the SEC.

“She’s working on crypto legislation and believes that financial regulators, including the SEC, have broad existing authority to crack down on crypto fraud and illegal money laundering,” Sarabia said.

There has been a long-running debate among regulators on which crypto assets should fall under the category of a commodity or a security, with Bitcoin (BTC) being the only asset to unanimously be seen as a commodity due to its truly decentralized nature.

Related: US CFTC commissioner calls for new category to protect small investors from crypto

Ether (ETH) has also been discussed as a commodity at times but with far more pushback. Notably, Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) chief Rostin Behnam recently backtracked on his view of ETH being a commodity while speaking at an invite-only crypto event at Princeton University. He now believes that Bitcoin holds that status.

Over in the crypto world, MicroStrategy founder and Bitcoin maximalist Michael Saylor has gone one step further by essentially calling for all crypto assets that aren’t BTC to be shut down, as he argued they are “committing securities fraud.”

During a Dec. 6 appearance on the PDB Podcast, Saylor reiterated his opinion that assets such as XRP (XRP), ETH and Solana (SOL) are all unregistered securities as they were issued and controlled by centralized entities.

Painting a scenario he would like to see, the fervent BTC maxi noted “the best thing for the world would be for the SEC to shut down all of it.”

Twitter users have, of course, mocked him for making such comments: