Blockchain pioneer and attorney Steven Neyaroff has raised concerns over the perceived inconsistency in the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) approach to classifying cryptocurrencies, particularly focusing on Ether. Neyaroff’s analysis centers on the divergent statements made by SEC Chair Gary Gensler and Ethereum co-founder Joseph Lubin.
Gensler, in confirming Lubin’s role as a venture capitalist, acknowledged that Lubin purchased Ether in substantial quantities for speculative purposes. Lubin, on the other hand, asserted that acquiring a cryptocurrency in large amounts or engaging in speculation categorizes it as a security. Neyaroff’s logical examination of these statements led him to conclude that Ether should be considered a security, aligning with both Gensler’s acknowledgment and Lubin’s definition.
In a detailed post, Neyaroff underscored the contradiction between the SEC chair’s and Ethereum co-founder’s stances, shedding light on the regulatory agency’s apparent lack of coherence in its crypto-related decisions. The attorney metaphorically emphasized the classification of Ether as a security, echoing the viewpoints expressed by both Gensler and Lubin in their recent remarks.
Neyaroff’s analysis delved into a video where Lubin described Ether as a consumer token. Lubin elaborated on Ether’s role as a means of payment for various decentralized processes, portraying it as a token representing the provision of shared resources to the decentralized world.
Lubin, discussing regulatory challenges, emphasized his team’s dedication to adhering to securities laws by issuing investor tokens or tokenized securities, while also distinguishing consumer utility tokens like Ether. He highlighted the importance of obtaining clear definitions and fostering regulators’ understanding of network business models that leverage membership tokens or tokens representing the consumption of scarce resources.
According to Lubin, as long as companies sell crypto tokens to users for practical purposes rather than in large quantities to speculators seeking financial gains from others’ actions, those tokens can be deemed consumer tokens.
Disclaimer:
It’s crucial to note that the information provided in this article is for educational and informational purposes only, and it does not constitute financial advice. Readers are urged to exercise caution and conduct their own research before making any financial decisions related to the content discussed. Coin Edition disclaims responsibility for any losses incurred through the use of mentioned content, products, or services.
No Comment