Connect with us

Published

on

Sam Bankman-Fried, CEO and Founder of FTX, walks near the U.S. Capitol, in Washington, D.C., September 15, 2022.

Graeme Sloan | Sipa via AP Images

NASSAU, Bahamas — Despite being pushed out of the cryptocurrency giant he founded, Sam Bankman-Fried told CNBC he is trying to lock down a multibillion-dollar deal to bail out FTX, which filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection earlier this month.

In a brief interview with CNBC late Friday, the FTX founder declined to give details about the downfall of his crypto conglomerate, or what he knew beyond liabilities being “billions of dollars larger than I thought.” Bankman-Fried declined an on-camera interview or broader discussion on the record. He said he was focused on retrieving customer funds and is still on a quest to secure a deal. 

“I think we should be trying to get as much value to users as possible. I hate what happened and deeply wish that I had been more careful,” Bankman-Fried told CNBC. 

Bankman-Fried also maintained that there are “billions” of dollars in customer assets in jurisdictions “where there were segregated balances,” including in the U.S., and said “there are billions of dollars of potential funding opportunities out there” to make customers whole. 

What was once a $32 billion global empire has imploded in recent weeks. Rival Binance had signed a letter of intent to buy FTX’s international business as it faced a liquidity crunch. But its team decided the exchange was beyond saving, with one Binance executive describing the balance sheet as if “a bomb went off.” FTX filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection on Nov. 11 and appointed John Ray III as the new CEO, whose corporate experience includes restructuring Enron in the wake of its historic collapse. 

Despite losing access to his corporate email and all company systems, Bankman-Fried maintains that he can play a role in the next steps. Venture capital investors have told CNBC the 30-year-old had been calling to try and secure funding in recent weeks. Still, investors said they couldn’t imagine any firm with a large enough balance sheet or risk appetite to bail out the beleaguered FTX. 

A long-shot, Bankman-Fried-brokered deal would be viewed in the same way as any competitive bailout offer, according to legal experts.

“He’s no different than any third-party suitor at this point, other than the fact that he’s a majority FTX shareholder,” said Adam Levitin, a Georgetown University law professor and principal at Gordian Crypto Advisors. “He could come into Delaware with an unsolicited offer, and say I want to buy out all the creditors for a price. But that would have to be approved by the bankruptcy court — he can’t force a deal.”

FTX’s new CEO has also said he’s open to a bailout. On Saturday, Ray said the crypto company is looking to sell or restructure its global empire. 

“Based on our review over the past week, we are pleased to learn that many regulated or licensed subsidiaries of FTX, within and outside of the United States, have solvent balance sheets, responsible management and valuable franchises,” FTX chief Ray, said in a statement, adding it is “a priority” in the coming weeks to “explore sales, recapitalizations or other strategic transactions.”

After reviewing the state of FTX’s finances last week, Ray said he’s never seen “such a complete failure of corporate controls and such a complete absence of trustworthy financial information” in his 40-year career. He added that Bankman-Fried and the top executives were “a very small group of inexperienced, unsophisticated and potentially compromised individuals,” calling the situation “unprecedented.”

Battle in the Bahamas 

Part of Bankman-Fried’s ability to sign a deal may come down to which jurisdiction has more say in the bankruptcy process.

In a recent filing, Ray cited a conversation with a Vox reporter last week in which Bankman-Fried suggested that customers would be in a better position if “we” can “win a jurisdictional battle versus Delaware.” He also told Vox he “regrets” filing for Chapter 11 bankruptcy, which took any FTX restructuring out of his control, adding “f— regulators.”

Billions in FTX customer assets are now caught in limbo between a bankruptcy court in Delaware, and liquidation in the Bahamas

Ray put FTX and more than 100 subsidiaries under Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in Delaware — but that didn’t include FTX Digital Markets, which is based in the Bahamas. The Nassau-based leg of FTX doesn’t own or control any other entities, according to the organizational chart filed by Ray.

The Securities Commission of the Bahamas has hired its own liquidators to oversee the recovery of assets and is backing a Chapter 15 process in New York, which gives foreign representatives recognition in U.S. proceedings. As part of that process, Bahamas regulators said they transferred customers’ cryptocurrency to another account to “protect” creditors and clients. It also said the U.S. Chapter 11 bankruptcy process doesn’t apply to them. 

The Bahamas move flies in the face of what’s happening in Delaware.

The FTX estate said that those withdrawals were “unauthorized” and accused the Bahamas government of working with Bankman-Fried on that transfer. FTX’s new leadership team has challenged Bahamian liquidators, and asked the U.S. court to intervene while enforcing an automatic stay — a standard feature of Chapter 11 proceedings. Typically, bankruptcy is meant to fence off assets to make sure they can’t be touched without court approval.

FTX’s team said the Bahamian group had no right to move money and called the Bahamas withdrawals “unauthorized.” Data firm Elliptic estimated the value of the transfer, which was initially thought to be a hack, to be around $477 million.

“There are some issues that require either coordination or fighting to figure out — there’s going to be some jockeying when it comes to assets in the Bahamas vs. the U.S.,” said Daniel Besikof, partner at Loeb & Loeb. “The Bahamas folks are taking a broader read of their mandate and the U.S. is taking a more technical read.”

The bankruptcy mayhem is partly a result of messy accounting on the part of FTX. Under Bankman-Fried’s leadership, Ray said the company “did not maintain centralized control of its cash” — “there was no accurate list of bank accounts and signatories” — and “an insufficient attention to the creditworthiness of banking partners.” 

Part of the Bahamas’ motivation for control may come down to economic interests. FTX hosted a high-profile finance conference with SALT in Nassau and planned to invest $60 million in a new headquarters that one top executive likened to Google’s or Apple’s campus in Silicon Valley. 

“Some of it is about protecting domestic creditors — this is a Bahamas company. There’s also a lot of money to be made for local Bahamian law firms, you have the whole trickle down effect,” said Georgetown’s Levitin. “There’s going to be some level of a staring contest between the Delaware bankruptcy court and the Bahamas regulator.”

Bankman-Fried’s future

Some experts say Bankman-Fried may be gunning for a bailout to reduce his own criminal liability and possible jail time. Bankman-Fried did not respond to a request for comment on potential charges.

Justin Danilewitz, a partner at Saul Ewing who focuses on white-collar crime, said while the odds of anyone flocking to make FTX whole are “highly unlikely given the staggering losses,” mitigating client losses can be a tactic to look better in the eyes of the court.

“That’s often highly advisable if a defendant is in a real pickle and the proof is compelling — it’s a good idea to try and make amends as promptly as possible,” Danilewitz said.

Some have likened that outcome to what happened at MF Global, formerly run by ex New Jersey Gov. Jon Corzine. The company was accused of using customer money to pay bills for the firm. But Corzine settled with the CFTC for $5 million, without admitting or denying misconduct.

The approach could backfire, Danilewitz said. That move could “reflect a degree of culpability or be viewed as an admission, and someone taking responsibility for what happened.”

Even if Bankman-Fried manages to play a role in recovering funds through a bailout, or somehow gains more control through a Bahamas liquidation process, he may face years of legal fights from possible wire fraud to civil litigation.

Wire fraud requires proof that a defendant engaged in a scheme to defraud, and used interstate wires to achieve that. The statutory maximum term is a 20-year sentence, in addition to fines. Danilewitz called it a “federal prosecutor’s favorite tool in the toolbox.” The key question, he said, will have to do with the defendant’s intent. “Was this all a big mishap, or was there intentional misconduct that could give rise to federal criminal liability?”

Others have likened Bankman-Fried’s legal situation to Bernie Madoff and Elizabeth Holmes, the latter of whom on Friday was sentenced to 11 years in prison for fraud after deceiving investors about the purported efficacy of her company’s blood-testing technology.

“The Theranos verdict should not have left him feeling good,” said Georgetown’s Levitin. “He has a real risk here. There’s the possibility of criminal liability, and civil liability.”

Continue Reading

Technology

Week in review: Stocks rise, Meta gets real on metaverse, and Salesforce bounces

Published

on

By

Week in review: Stocks rise, Meta gets real on metaverse, and Salesforce bounces

Continue Reading

Technology

‘Terrifying’: Why U.S. senator in top intel post wants more spying on Chinese companies

Published

on

By

'Terrifying': Why U.S. senator in top intel post wants more spying on Chinese companies

Sen. Mark Warner on a Chinese tech threat that will be bigger than Huawei

Go back a decade and most Americans had never heard of Huawei. Today, the Chinese telecom giant is a symbol of how quickly China can dominate a strategic technology sector and in the process create new national security and market threats for U.S. government and industry.

Democratic Senator Mark Warner of Virginia, the top Democrat on the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence, is now worried about another Chinese company that he predicts will eclipse Huawei in both scale and consequence: BGI. It is not building cell towers or smartphones for the 5G era. It is collecting DNA.

“If Huawei was big, BGI will be even bigger,” Warner said at the CNBC CFO Council Summit in Washington, D.C. on Wednesday.

BGI is one of the largest genomics companies in the world. It operates DNA sequencing laboratories in China and abroad. It processes genetic data for hospitals, pharmaceutical firms and researchers across dozens of countries, according to a recent report by the National Security Commission on Emerging Biotechnology.

The company began as a Beijing-based research entity, the Beijing Genomics Institute, tied closely to China’s national genome projects. It later expanded into a global commercial powerhouse, selling DNA sequencing, prenatal testing, cancer screening, and large-scale population genetic analysis, according to an NBC News report.

Through subsidiaries, BGI says it operates in the U.S. Europe, and Japan. In several countries, it helped built national genetic databases and pandemic testing systems.

A man visits the booth of BGI at the Healthy Life Chain area of the third China International Supply Chain Expo CISCE in Beijing, capital of China, July 16, 2025.

Xinhua News Agency | Xinhua News Agency | Getty Images

U.S. intelligence officials believe that global footprint gives BGI access to one the largest collections of genetic data on Earth. Lawmakers have warned that genetic data is not just medical information. At scale, it becomes a strategic asset spurring a “DNA arms race,” according to a Washington Post report. DNA profiles can reveal ancestry, physical traits, disease risk, and family relationships, and when linked with artificial intelligence, the data can also be used for surveillance, tracking and long-term biological research tied to national security, according to the Washington Post’s reporting.

At the CNBC event this week, Warner continued to press for more focus on BGI. “They are hoovering up DNA data,” Warner said. “This level of experimentation on humans and intellectual property theft, we all should be concerned about it.”

Congressional investigators have previously warned that BGI maintains close ties to the Chinese Communist Party and Chinese military, according to a report from the House Select Committee on the CCP. They argue that China makes little distinction between commercial data and state security needs.

The ‘super soldier’ fear

One of the biggest fears tied to BGI and China’s broader biotech push is the possibility of a genetically enhanced soldier. U.S. officials have publicly claimed that China has explored human performance enhancement and military biotechnology. U.S. defense analysts say China’s research spans population DNA collection, military databases, and AI-driven human performance modeling, according to a Wall Street Journal op-ed written by U.S. Director of the Central Intelligence Agency John Ratcliffe in 2020, when he was Director of National Intelligence during President Trump’s first term.

Warner directly referenced those concerns this week.

“It’s terrifying,” Warner said.

Troops make preparations before a military parade in Beijing, capital of China, Sept. 3, 2025.

Xinhua News Agency | Xinhua News Agency | Getty Images

Warner described China as a great nation and great competitor, and as a former telecom executive (he was among the founders of Nextel), he said what Huawei was able to execute on — producing good products at inexpensive prices before the U.S. and Western competitors were prepared — is a cautionary tale.

The BGI story looks uncomfortably familiar to Warner.

“Go back in time eight or nine years, and most people had never heard of Huawei,” he said.

Huawei rose by combining massive state support, global market access and aggressive pricing, not only outcompeting Western firms on scale and cost, but positioning itself inside the world’s telecom infrastructure before governments understood the security implications. Huawei was first placed on a U.S. trade blacklist in 2019, which banned U.S. firms from selling some technology to the Chinese tech giant over national security concerns. Chip restrictions on Huawei have since become even stricter.

But Warner said by the time the U.S. moved to restrict Huawei, “[we started to] lose a little.”

Much of the 5G backbone had already been shaped by Chinese technology.

During a separate interview with Javers at the CNBC CFO Council Summit, the Republican Chairman of the House committee on the Chinese Communist Party, Michigan congressman John Moolenaar, said “We’ve seen how they run the play of excess capacity, price manipulation, driving people out of business in different areas; they’re going to continue to run that play,” he said. “We want to be friendly with China, but China is not our friend. They are our foremost adversary,” he added.

The Soviet Union was a military and ideological competitor, but China, in tech domain after domain, Warner says — from telecom and 5G to AI, quantum computing and biotech — is a different kind of competitor.

Warner now sees BGI following a similar model in biotechnology. Like Huawei, BGI scaled rapidly with state support. The Washington, D.C.-based think tank Foundation of Defense of Democracies called upon lawmakers of both parties earlier this year to restrict BGI’s access to U.S. institutions.

Congress has been trying to pass various versions of the BIOSECURE Act, which would limit the ability of Chinese biotechs to operate in the U.S. Some U.S. hospitals and research institutions with ties to Chinese genomics firms are under federal pressure, according to the Associated Press, though some medical professionals within the U.S. say they risk losing key research support for core medical goals. BGI told the AP that the bill is “a false flag targeting companies under the premise of national security. We strictly follow rules and laws, and we have no access to Americans’ personal data in any of our work,” it said.

U.S. intel has moved too slowly, and disrupted key spying alliances

Warner said the U.S. intelligence apparatus has moved too slowly to recognize the biotech threat. He says that intelligence agencies focus too much on foreign governments and militaries, with less attention placed on commercial technology sectors. But in a world where technology supremacy is national security, Warner says more of our intelligence efforts need to reflect this shift.

Only in the past two to three years, he says, has the U.S. seriously expanded spying into AI, semiconductors, and biotechnology. Warner says we need a more “advanced approach” in this area, and he gave as one recent example when China’s largest chipmaker SMIC stunned U.S. officials by producing a six-nanometer chip despite sweeping U.S. export controls. The breakthrough showed that Washington had underestimated both China’s technical qualities and ability to work around restrictions. “We got caught off guard with the SMIC six-nanometer chip,” Warner said.

Warner is also worried that tracking China’s tech rise requires a type of deep cooperation with U.S. allies that the Trump administration has squandered, such as the global intelligence-sharing network called the “Five Eyes” alliance.

Those relationships are now under strain, he said, and key partners including the United Kingdom, the Netherlands, and France have gone public in saying they are reluctant to share intel with the U.S. “They feel like we may be politicizing the intel product and that is not good news for America,” Warner said.

Underlying his concerns about the technology competition with China in areas including AI and biotech is the U.S. ceding the global lead in standards setting. For decades, the U.S. shaped the rules for wireless networks, satellites, and internet infrastructure. That dominance help Americans lead global markets, Warner said, but now China is aggressively positioning itself as the international standards setter.

Warner described the U.S. role in international bodies as one of the “secret sauces” in the era of America’s dominance of the global economy and technology, allowing the U.S. to leverage innovations occurring around the globe, “even if it didn’t arise in America.”

Across technology domains, influencing standards and protocols is critical to not only maintaining a competitive edge but also establishing ethical boundaries. “Will it be us or the Chinese?” Warner said. “The Chinese come in with clearly a less humanist approach. It’s been effective in lots of domains. We see it on standards-setting bodies. China floods the zone with lots of engineers, almost buying off the votes. We’ve got to reengage for American business and government,” he said.

Continue Reading

Technology

Biggest mistakes crypto investors make with estate planning

Published

on

By

Biggest mistakes crypto investors make with estate planning

Roughly 1 in 7 people are leaving unclaimed property on the table, according to the National Association of Unclaimed Property Administrators. While the recent heavy selling in bitcoin and ether is rightly getting all the short-term attention, this estate planning issue is a longer-term one that’s likely to be exacerbated as crypto adoption and ownership increase.

Many people neglect to account for cryptocurrency in their estate plans, or they don’t let their heirs know how to access their crypto holdings. With surveys in recent years from Gallup and Pew Research estimating that 14% to 17% of U.S. adults have owned cryptocurrency, losing access to those funds is a growing concern.

“Leaving property or mutual funds behind in a will is pretty cut and dried, but with more and more assets placed in cryptocurrency, a large share of inherited assets are in danger of forfeiture,” said Azriel Baer, partner in the estate planning and administration group at law firm Farrell Fritz.

This issue could be mitigated, in part, by crypto ETFs, which are gaining popularity with investors since the first batch of spot bitcoin ETFs were approved by the SEC in 2024, such as the iShares Bitcoin Trust (IBIT), followed a few months later by ethereum spot price ETFs, such as the Fidelity Ethereum Fund ETF (FETH). These ETFs allow investors access to the crypto asset class without actually owning crypto outright, helping reduce the chances of actual crypto getting lost.

Nevertheless, estate planning mistakes among crypto owners are common and can be avoided. Here are some of the biggest issues cryptocurrency owners need to tackle sooner rather than later.

Wills, if they exist, often don’t include digital assets language

Only 24% of Americans have a will that describes how they want their money and estate managed after their death, according to a survey from Caring.com. Even people who have wills in place have not updated them for many years, with nearly one in four Americans saying they haven’t touched their wills since their original was drafted, according to the survey.

This can be problematic for many reasons. An old will may no longer reflect people’s current wishes. In a crypto-specific context, anyone who hasn’t updated their estate plan in the past several years may not have language to provide legal authority for the trustee or executor to gain access to digital assets.

“It’s very common for people not to update their estate planning documents for 10, 20 years or sometimes longer. If that’s the case, you’re behind,” said Patrick D. Owens, shareholder at Buchalter and a member of the law firm’s tax, benefits and estate planning practice group.

Absent language about digital assets, your heirs might have to go to court to get the authority for the executor or administrator of the estate to gain access to the crypto assets. Most likely they’ll get access, “but it’s a hassle,” Owens said. “Obviously, it means time and money going into court.”

Even with a will, crypto assets can get stuck in court

A standard will is appropriate for many people, but many attorneys recommend clients also utilize a revocable living trust as part of their estate plan. Drafting a will is less expensive, but a revocable living trust offers more privacy and can help limit the time and expense of the probate process after death.

Baer advises clients to transfer their crypto to a revocable living trust so the trustee has immediate access upon the owner’s death. It could be six to eight months, or more, before a will is settled in probate and in the meantime, heirs wouldn’t have access to the assets. If the price of the crypto was going down rapidly, for example, they would have to wait to sell it if the estate was caught up in probate. Putting crypto assets into a revocable trust to avoid probate can prevent a lot of headaches, he said. 

Generally, a revocable trust is paired with a pour-over will so that assets not included in the trust at the time of a person’s death are transferred to the trust and distributed accordingly. 

Not sharing basic crypto information can cost millions

You don’t have to tell heirs you’re worth a fortune in bitcoin before you pass away, but you should make sure they know how to access your crypto after you’re gone. 

Baer worked on an estate where tens of millions of dollars in crypto were lost to the heirs because they didn’t know the decedent’s private keys, which function as digital passwords to grant access to cryptocurrency funds and prove ownership of blockchain assets.

Someone should know how to access the assets, whether through written instructions in a safe box, a safe at home, or directions kept with a lawyer or with one of the various crypto inheritance services that help ensure crypto assets are passed on to your family members, Baer said. Don’t put these private keys or other sensitive information in a will, because wills become public through the probate process, he added.

Many designated fiduciaries can’t handle crypto 

The person you chose to handle your other assets may not be the right person to deal with the crypto portion of your estate.

Not everyone understands crypto, the associated volatility or how to transact with digital currency, meaning lots of money can inadvertently be lost. The recent volatility in the price of bitcoin is a reminder that if you name someone who needs weeks to get up to speed on how to transact with bitcoin, the financial losses could be meaningful, Baer said. “Uncle Bob may be a great person, but he may have more challenges transacting with an asset class he’s totally not familiar with,” he added.

Sometimes, even institutional trustees might not be able to take on the responsibility for crypto. Owens had a client pass away with half a million dollars in bitcoin and ether. The institutional trustee who oversaw the client’s account refused to take on the responsibility for the crypto and a special trustee was named. Luckily, the client had a nephew who took on the role, but finding a suitable replacement can often be costly from a time and money perspective, Owens said. 

Failure to plan for crypto estate taxes

With the massive explosion in the values around cryptocurrency, many people have large crypto holdings, which could be subject to significant taxes, whether that’s income taxes or estate taxes, and failure to plan could be detrimental to their families, said Jonathan Forster, shareholder at law firm Weinstock Manion.

There could, for example, be estate taxes due, depending on the size of the estate. The federal estate tax exemption for 2025 is $13.99 million per individual. Some states also have a state-level estate tax.

Knowing the impact crypto ownership might have on your estate is an important consideration while you are alive. Forster has clients whose crypto holdings are worth more than $50 million. They wanted an efficient way to make gifts for the benefit of their children to get some money out of their estate. They created a limited liability corporation, transferred the crypto into the LLC and gifted an interest in the LLC to an irrevocable trust for the benefit of minor children with an independent trustee, Forster said. 

Many crypto investors fail to keep track of cost basis, which can be problematic for many reasons, including if you’re considering gifting digital assets during your lifetime. If you want to gift the assets while you’re alive, you need to have the basis so the recipient can properly account for the crypto if it’s eventually sold, Baer said. “It can be onerous to keep track of basis, but it’s important,” he said.

Continue Reading

Trending