Tornado Cash indictment fails to show ‘clear violation’ of certain laws: Coin Center
Crypto advocacy group Coin Center has criticized the latest indictment of two former Tornado Cash developers, arguing that the facts offered don’t show any clear violations of money-transmitting-related offenses.
Roman Storm and Romen Semenov were indicted by the United States Office of Foreign Asset Control (OFAC) on Aug. 23 for conspiring to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business, among other charges.
In a follow-up opinion piece, Coin Center research director Peter Van Valkenburgh argues that the claims in the indictment appear to run counter to guidance from the U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network — arguing that Tornado Cash only provides the software to transmit money, rather than transmitting the money itself.
New Tornado Cash indictments seem to run counter to FinCEN guidance
Coin Center’s initial thoughts on a case that could potentially criminalize the publication of software codehttps://t.co/YCBv3vsZAE
— Neeraj K Agrawal (@NeerajKA) August 23, 2023
“The only thing the indictment claims regarding the defendants’ unlicensed money transmission is that they ‘engaged in the business of transferring funds on behalf of the public’ and did so without registering with FinCEN,” wrote Valkenburgh.
But does the indictment state any facts that actually show that the defendants engaged in any activities that qualify as money transmission under the relevant law?
He pointed to an interpretation by FinCEN as to what constitutes “money transmission services” under the U.S. Bank Secrecy Act, which states:
“An anonymizing software provider is not a money transmitter.”
Valkenburgh then referred to another excerpt stating that only people using the software can be considered money transmitters:
“[A] person that utilizes the software to anonymize the person’s own transactions will be either a user or a money transmitter, depending on the purpose of each transaction.”
While Valkenburgh said that Tornado Cash made it easier for individuals to use the protocol’s smart contracts to transmit money, he argued it doesn’t mean that the developers were money transmitters themselves.
“[But] that doesn’t somehow mean that they became transmitters merely because they provided tools that others used to transmit their own money,” Valkenburgh explained.
Valkenburgh also criticized claims in the indictment suggesting that Storm and Semenov had complete control over the protocol’s smart contracts.
“Ethereum smart contracts are variable and sometimes people have no control over their operation, some control, or total control. This is the key fact needed to determine whether one is performing money transmission, he argued.
Related: Crypto lobbyists still fighting to axe ‘unlawful’ Tornado Cash sanctions
Coin Center first voiced its opposition toward the U.S. Treasury in October when it sued the agency for its unprecedented and unlawful sanctioning of Tornado Cash.
The OFAC indictment claims Storm and Semenov ran an unlicensed money transmission service by engaging in the business of transferring funds on behalf of the public. The enforcement agency claimed the developers should have registered with FinCEN.
Semenov was added to OFAC’s list of Specially Designated Nationals and Blocked Persons on Aug. 23, while Storm was arrested by the Federal Bureau of Investigation in Washington state on the same day.
Alexey Pertsev, another one of Tornado Cash’s founders, was imprisoned by Dutch authorities in Aug. 2022 before being released in late April.
Valkenburgh believes the outcome of the Tornado Cash saga will have a profound impact on the legal rights of United States citizens to build and publish software in the future.
Magazine: Magazine: Tornado Cash 2.0 — The race to build safe and legal coin mixers
Politics
Rayner’s combative, defiant performance in Commons signals to Labour MPs she’s here to make a comeback and shows them what they’ve been missing
The day after Sir Keir Starmer said he wanted Angela Rayner back in the cabinet, she showed Labour MPs what they’ve been missing.
The former deputy prime minister delighted Labour backbenchers with a powerful Commons speech defending her workers’ rights legislation on Monday evening.
With the House of Lords locked in a battle of parliamentary “ping pong” with MPs, she told ministers: “Now is not the time to blink or buckle.”
Her very public intervention came amid claims that her next move has the Labour Party on tenterhooks and that she’s the favourite to succeed Sir Keir if she wants the job.
And her speech, delivered from notes and clearly meticulously prepared, appeared to send a message to Labour MPs: I’m here to make a comeback.
The government’s flagship Employment Rights Bill was championed by Ms Rayner when she was deputy PM, in the face of bitter opposition from the Conservatives.
In a bid to end the deadlock with the Lords, ministers have backed down on unfair dismissal protection from day one, proposing a compromise of six months.
Backing the compromise, brokered with the TUC, Ms Rayner said: “I know ministers had faced difficult decisions and difficult discussions with the employers and worker representatives.
“But I strongly believe that the work that has been done has been necessary, and we should be able to move forward now.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Could Rayner come back?
Attacking the upper chamber for delaying the legislation, she said: “There is now no more time to waste.
“Vested interests worked with the Tories and the Lib Dems and, cheered on by Reform and backed by the Greens, to resist the manifesto on which we were elected.
“And now there can be no excuses. We have a mandate for a new deal for working people, and we must, and we will deliver it.
And she concluded: “It has been a battle to pass this bill, but progress is always a struggle that we fought for. Its passage will be a historic achievement for this Labour government.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Angela Rayner’s resignation speech
“It will benefit working people now and into the future. Now is not the time to blink or buckle. Let’s not waste a minute more. It’s time to deliver.”
It was the sort of fighting talk and defiance of the government’s opponents that will have cheered up Labour MPs and boosted her hopes of a comeback and even a leadership bid.
It came as speculation over Sir Keir’s future grows more frenzied by the day, with claims that even some of his own supporters have begun the hunt for his successor.
The thinktank that ran his leadership campaign in 2020, Labour Together, is reported to be canvassing party members on candidates to replace him.
Wes Streeting and Angela Rayner.
There was even a claim last week that allies of Wes Streeting were sounding out Labour MPs about a pact with Ms Rayner and a joint ticket for the leadership.
The health secretary dismissed that claim as a “silly season story”, while a Rayner ally said: “There’s no vacancy and there’s no pact”. They added that she will not “be played like a pawn”.
Mr Streeting did, however, start speculation himself when he said in his Labour conference speech: “We want her back. We need her back.”
Fuelling more speculation, Sir Keir went further than he had previously on Sunday, when he was asked in an Observer interview if he missed her and replied; “Yes, of course I do. I was really sad that we lost her.”
And asked if she would return to the cabinet, the prime minister said: “Yes. She’s hugely talented.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
‘Angela Rayner, this achievement is yours.’
Sir Keir also described Ms Rayner, who left school at 16 without any qualifications, as “the best social mobility story this country has ever seen”.
But a swift return to the cabinet would be hugely controversial, because the PM’s ethic adviser, Sir Laurie Magner, ruled that she breached the ministerial code by underpaying stamp duty when she bought a flat.
But she has been linked to speculation about possible efforts to remove Sir Keir if – as predicted – Labour performs badly in the Scottish, Welsh and local elections next May.
Her supporters also claim she will eventually be cleared by HMRC over her stamp duty breach, clearing the way for her to come back.
And her latest speech – combative, defiant and yet loyal – will have boosted her hopes, and reminded Labour MPs what they’ve missed since she quit in September.
The Sandie Peggie case has been such a high-profile story because it gets to the heart of the debate about trans rights versus women’s rights, which has been so fraught in recent years – especially in Scotland.
While the Supreme Court ruled in April that the Equality Act referred to a person’s biological sex – with major ramifications over who can use female-protected spaces – we are still waiting for long-delayed government guidance on how this should be applied. We are told it’s due “as soon as possible”.
Government minister Dame Diana Johnson brightly told Darren McCaffrey on Sky’s Politics Hub on Monday that organisations “just need to get on with it – the law is clear”.
But with so many organisations waiting for government guidance before changing policy – that’s clearly not the case.
Tap here for the latest political news
Campaigners have criticised the Peggie tribunal for not following the Supreme Court’s lead more directly. The tribunal didn’t find that it was wrong to let Dr Upton use the female changing rooms – just that action should have been taken after Ms Peggie complained.
Her lawyers say that is hugely problematic, as it puts the onus on a woman to complain.
The political reaction has been swift. Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch has long been outspoken on this issue, and she has posted a typically punchy statement in response to the case.
“It’s ridiculous it took two years to reach a verdict that was so obvious from the start,” she wrote on X.
“This entire episode is indicative of a system wasting time and taxpayers’ money to please a small cabal of activists.”
Nurse Sandie Peggie, pictured outside the Edinburgh Tribunals Service after she won a claim for harassment. Pic: PA
But it’s not just the Tories. Scottish Labour MP Joani Reid described Ms Peggie’s treatment as “a disgrace…enabled by a warped NHS culture and fostered by a Scottish government that refused to listen to women’s concerns”.
Of course, the SNP have always been hugely supportive of trans rights, attempting to pass gender recognition laws which would have made it much easier for people to self-ID. That legislation was blocked by the UK Supreme Court.
John Swinney gave a carefully worded response when asked about the issue on Monday, saying “it’s important to take time to consider the judgment” with no further comment on the questions raised by the case.
Sir Keir Starmer, too, has long been dogged by criticism over the lack of clarity in some of his answers to the question “what is a woman”, although he has sought to be more definite in recent years.
Anna Turley, the chair of the Labour Party, said on Monday that it’s more important to get the Supreme Court guidance right than to get it out quickly.
But Monday’s judgment shows the urgent importance of both.
With Do Kwon scheduled to be sentenced on Thursday after pleading guilty to two felony counts, a US federal judge is asking prosecutors and defense attorneys about the Terraform Labs co-founder’s legal troubles in his native country, South Korea, and Montenegro.
In a Monday filing in the US District Court for the Southern District of New York, Judge Paul Engelmayer asked Kwon’s lawyers and attorneys representing the US government about the charges and “maximum and minimum sentences” the Terraform co-founder could face in South Korea, where he is expected to be extradited after potentially serving prison time in the United States.
Kwon pleaded guilty to two counts of wire fraud and conspiracy to defraud in August and is scheduled to be sentenced by Engelmayer on Thursday.
In addition to the judge’s questions on Kwon potentially serving time in South Korea, he asked whether there was agreement that “none of Mr. Kwon’s time in custody in Montenegro” — where he served a four-month sentence for using falsified travel documents and fought extradition to the US for more than a year — would be credited to any potential US sentence.
Judge Engelmayer’s questions signaled concerns that, should the US grant extradition to South Korea to serve “the back half of his sentence,” the country’s authorities could release him early.
Kwon was one of the most prominent figures in the crypto and blockchain industry in 2022 before the collapse of the Terra ecosystem, which many experts agree contributed to a market crash that resulted in several companies declaring bankruptcy and significant losses to investors.
Defense attorneys requested that Kwon serve no more than five years in the US, while prosecutors are pushing for at least 12 years.
Related: There’s more to crypto crime than meets the eye: What you need to know
The sentencing recommendation from the US government said that Kwon had “caused losses that eclipsed those caused” by former FTX CEO Sam Bankman-Fried, former Celsius CEO Alex Mashinsky and OneCoin’s Karl Sebastian Greenwood combined. All three men are serving multi-year sentences in federal prison.
Will Do Kwon serve time in South Korea?
The Terraform co-founder’s lawyers said that even if Engelmayer were to sentence Kwon to time served, he would “immediately reenter pretrial detention pending his criminal charges in South Korea,” and potentially face up to 40 years in the country, where he holds citizenship.
Thursday’s sentencing hearing could mark the beginning of the end of Kwon’s chapter in the 2022 collapse of Terraform. His whereabouts amid the crypto market downturn were not publicly known until he was arrested in Montenegro and held in custody to await extradition to the US, where he was indicted in March 2023 for his role at Terraform.
South Korean authorities issued an arrest warrant for Kwon in 2022, but have not had him in custody since the collapse of the Terra ecosystem. The country’s prosecutors applied to extradite Kwon from Montenegro simultaneously with the US, while they were pursuing similar cases against individuals tied to Terraform.
Magazine: When privacy and AML laws conflict: Crypto projects’ impossible choice
-
Sports2 years agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports3 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Sports3 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Environment3 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment1 year agoHere are the best electric bikes you can buy at every price level in October 2024