SEC proposes rules that would change which crypto firms can custody customer assets

The Securities and Exchange Commission voted 4-1 on Wednesday to propose sweeping changes to federal regulations that would expand custody rules to include assets like crypto and require companies to gain or maintain registration in order to hold those customer assets.

The proposed amendments to federal custody rules would “expand the scope” to include any client assets under the custody of an investment advisor. Current federal regulations only include assets like funds or securities, and require investment advisors, like Fidelity or Merrill Lynch, to hold those assets with a federal- or state-chartered bank, with a few highly specific exceptions.

It would be the SEC’s most overt effort to rein in even regulated crypto exchanges that have substantial institutional custody programs serving high-net-worth individuals and entities which custody investor assets, like hedge funds or retirement investment managers.

The move poses a fresh threat to crypto exchange custody programs, as other federal regulators actively discourage custodians like banks from holding customer crypto assets. The amendments also come as the SEC aggressively accelerates enforcement attempts.

While the amendment doesn’t specify crypto companies, Gensler said in a separate statement that “though some crypto trading and lending platforms may claim to custody investors’ crypto, that does not mean they are qualified custodians.”

Under the new rules, in order to custody any client asset — including and specifically crypto — an institution would have to hold the charters, or qualify as a registered broker-dealer, futures commission merchant, or be a certain kind of trust or foreign financial institution.

SEC officials said that the proposal would not alter the requirements to be a qualified custodian and that there was nothing precluding state-chartered trust companies, including Coinbase or Gemini, from serving as qualified custodians.

The officials emphasized that the proposed amendments did not make a decision on which cryptocurrencies the SEC considered securities.

The amended regulation would also require a written agreement between custodians and advisors, expand the “surprise examination” requirements, and enhance recordkeeping rules.

The SEC had previously sought public feedback on whether crypto-friendly state-chartered trusts, like those in Wyoming, were “qualified custodians.”

“Make no mistake: Today’s rule, the 2009 rule, covers a significant amount of crypto assets,” Gensler said in a statement. “As the release states, ‘most crypto assets are likely to be funds or crypto asset securities covered by the current rule.’ Further, though some crypto trading and lending platforms may claim to custody investors’ crypto, that does not mean they are qualified custodians.”

But Gensler’s proposal seemed to undercut comments from SEC officials, who insisted the moves were designed with “all assets” in mind. The SEC chair alluded to several high-profile crypto bankruptcies in recent months, including those of Celsius, Voyager, and FTX.

“When these platforms go bankrupt—something we’ve seen time and again recently—investors’ assets often have become property of the failed company, leaving investors in line at the bankruptcy court,” Gensler said.

The proposed changes by the SEC are also intended to “ensure client assets are properly segregated and held in accounts designed to protect the assets in the event of a qualified custodian bankruptcy or other insolvency,” according to material released by the agency on Wednesday.

Coinbase already has a similar arrangement in place. In its most recent earnings report, the exchange specified that it keeps customer crypto assets “bankruptcy remote” from hypothetical general creditors, but noted that the “novelty” of crypto assets meant it was uncertain how courts would treat them.

The SEC has already begun to target other lucrative revenue streams for crypto institutions like Coinbase, which is the only publicly traded pure crypto exchange in the U.S. Last week, the SEC announced a settlement with crypto exchange Kraken over its staking program, alleging it constituted an unregistered offering and sale of securities.

At the time, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong said a potential move against staking would be a “terrible path” for consumers.

Coinbase reported $19.8 million in institutional transaction revenue and $14.5 million in custodial fee revenue for the three months ending Sept. 30, 2022. Together, that institutional revenue represented about 5.8% of Coinbase’s $590.3 million in revenue for that same time period. But that percentage does not include any revenue from blockchain rewards or interest income from institutional custody clients.

“Coinbase Custody Trust Co. is already a qualified custodian, and after listening to today’s SEC meeting, we are confident that we will remain a qualified custodian even if this proposed rule is enacted as proposed,” Coinbase chief legal officer Paul Grewal said. “We agree with the need for consumer protections — as a reminder, our client assets are segregated and protected in any eventuality.”

Grayscale Bitcoin Trust (GBTC), for example, custodies billions of dollars worth of bitcoin using Coinbase Custody, holding roughly 3.4% of the world’s bitcoin in May 2022.

In the aftermath of the SEC’s approval vote, comments from commissioners made it unclear what the full extent of the SEC’s proposed rulemaking would be, and how it could impact existing partnerships. Grayscale is not a registered investment advisor, and so under the proposed amendments would not apparently face any material impact to their custody arrangement.

A person familiar with the matter did not expect the relationship would be adversely affected, noting Coinbase Custody’s qualified custodian status as a New York state-chartered trust, and observing that investment advisors might even transition from directly holding bitcoin to owning GBTC shares as a result of the proposed amendments.

Within the commissioner’s ranks, there was dissent and questions over the nature of the proposed rules. “The proposing release takes great pains to paint a “no-win” scenario for crypto assets,” SEC commissioner Mark Uyeda said. “In other words, an adviser may custody crypto assets at a bank, but banks are cautioned by their regulators not to custody crypto assets.”

But Uyeda also noted that the proposal was a move towards rulemaking, rather than what he called a historic use of “enforcement actions to introduce novel legal and regulatory theories.’

It was a sentiment echoed by Coinbase’s chief legal officer, who emphasized a need for clarity, a clarion call that has been echoed throughout the industry. “We encourage the SEC to begin the rulemaking process on what should or should not be considered a crypto security, especially given that today’s proposal acknowledges that not all crypto assets are securities. Rulemaking on that topic could offer needed clarity to consumers, investors, and the industry,” Grewal said.

— CNBC’s Kate Rooney contributed to this report.

Source link

#SEC #proposes #rules #change #crypto #firms #custody #customer #assets

What investors need to know about ‘staking,’ the passive income opportunity at the center of crypto’s latest regulation scare

Not six months ago, ether led a recovery in cryptocurrency prices ahead of a big tech upgrade that would make something called “staking” available to crypto investors.

Most people have hardly wrapped their heads around the concept, but now, the price of ether is falling amid mounting fears that the Securities and Exchange Commission could crack down on it.

On Thursday, Kraken, one of the largest crypto exchanges in the world, closed its staking program in a $30 million settlement with the SEC, which said the company failed to register the offer and sale of its crypto staking-as-a-service program.

The night before, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong warned his Twitter followers that the securities regulator may want more broadly to end staking for U.S. retail customers.

“This should put everyone on notice in this marketplace,” SEC Chair Gary Gensler told CNBC’s “Squawk Box” Friday morning. “Whether you call it lend, earn, yield, whether you offer an annual percentage yield – that doesn’t matter. If someone is taking [customer] tokens and transferring to their platform, the platform controls it.”

Staking has widely been seen as a catalyst for mainstream adoption of crypto and a big revenue opportunity for exchanges like Coinbase. A clampdown on staking, and staking services, could have damaging consequences not just for those exchanges, but also Ethereum and other proof-of-stake blockchain networks. To understand why, it helps to have a basic understanding of the activity in question.

Here’s what you need to know:

What is staking?

Staking is a way for investors to earn passive yield on their cryptocurrency holdings by locking tokens up on the network for a period of time. For example, if you decide you want to stake your ether holdings, you would do so on the Ethereum network. The bottom line is it allows investors to put their crypto to work if they’re not planning to sell it anytime soon.

How does staking work?

Staking is sometimes referred to as the crypto version of a high-interest savings account, but there’s a major flaw in that comparison: crypto networks are decentralized, and banking institutions are not.

Earning interest through staking is not the same thing as earning interest from a high annual percentage yield offered by a centralized platform like those that ran into trouble last year, like BlockFi and Celsius, or Gemini just last month. Those offerings really were more akin to a savings account: people would deposit their crypto with centralized entities that lent those funds out and promised rewards to the depositors in interest (of up to 20% in some cases). Rewards vary by network but generally, the more you stake, the more you earn.

By contrast, when you stake your crypto, you are contributing to the proof-of-stake system that keeps decentralized networks like Ethereum running and secure; you become a “validator” on the blockchain, meaning you verify and process the transactions as they come through, if chosen by the algorithm. The selection is semi-random – the more crypto you stake, the more likely you’ll be chosen as a validator.

The lock-up of your funds serves as a sort of collateral that can be destroyed if you as a validator act dishonestly or insincerely.

This is true only for proof-of-stake networks like Ethereum, Solana, Polkadot and Cardano. A proof-of-work network like Bitcoin uses a different process to confirm transactions.

Staking as a service

In most cases, investors won’t be staking themselves – the process of validating network transactions is just impractical on both the retail and institutional levels.

That’s where crypto service providers like Coinbase, and formerly Kraken, come in. Investors can give their crypto to the staking service and the service does the staking on the investors’ behalf. When using a staking service, the lock-up period is determined by the networks (like Ethereum or Solana), and not the third party (like Coinbase or Kraken).

It’s also where it gets a little murky with the SEC, which said Thursday that Kraken should have registered the offer and sale of the crypto asset staking-as-a-service program with the securities regulator.

While the SEC hasn’t given formal guidance on what crypto assets it deems securities, it generally sees a red flag if someone makes an investment with a reasonable expectation of profits that would be derived from the work or effort of others.

Coinbase has about 15% of the market share of Ethereum assets, according to Oppenheimer. The industry’s current retail staking participation rate is 13.7% and growing.

Proof-of-stake vs. proof-of-work

Staking works only for proof-of-stake networks like Ethereum, Solana, Polkadot and Cardano. A proof-of-work network, like Bitcoin, uses a different process to confirm transactions.

The two are simply the protocols used to secure cryptocurrency networks.

Proof-of-work requires specialized computing equipment, like high-end graphics cards to validate transactions by solving highly complex math problems. Validators gets rewards for each transaction they confirm. This process requires a ton of energy to complete.

Ethereum’s big migration to proof-of-stake from proof-of-work improved its energy efficiency almost 100%.

Risks involved

The source of return in staking is different from traditional markets. There aren’t humans on the other side promising returns, but rather the protocol itself paying investors to run the computational network.

Despite how far crypto has come, it’s still a young industry filled with technological risks, and potential bugs in the code is a big one. If the system doesn’t work as expected, it’s possible investors could lose some of their staked coins.

Volatility is and has always been a somewhat attractive feature in crypto but it comes with risks, too. One of the biggest risks investors face in staking is simply a drop in the price. Sometimes a big decline can lead smaller projects to hike their rates to make a potential opportunity more attractive.

Source link

#investors #staking #passive #income #opportunity #center #cryptos #latest #regulation #scare