Third, there was pushback against Gensler for not owning or using crypto. “It is hard to understand something without using it,” writes Anthony Pompliano. “The idea that we have regulators who are actively making rules for something that they have never used seems confusing.”
… If you start from the assumption that crypto is the future of payments, or of the financial system, or of art or identity or the web or whatever, then, sure, the people regulating it should understand its mechanics and possibly be users and enthusiasts themselves. If you don’t start from that assumption, though, it seems reasonable to let the regulators examine the effects of crypto and decide whether it’s good or bad. I think it is plausible for a regulator to look at crypto’s track record in 2022 and say “we need much more restrictive anti-fraud enforcement in crypto” without using crypto himself, or understanding the technical workings of a blockchain, or whatever. He can judge by the effects. Nobody would say to the prosecutors looking into the FTX bankruptcy, “how can you prosecute this case if you never even owned any FTT tokens?” Owning FTT tokens is not a prerequisite to understanding or prosecuting FTX. Arguably owning FTT tokens is proof that you didn’t understand FTX.
‘Enforcement 40’ for 2020
Join Us On LinkedIn
Join the Securities Litigation and Enforcement Group on LinkedIn