A United States District Court has allowed a nearly three-year-long class action lawsuit against the creators of HelbizCoin to go ahead, as per a court ruling filed on Sept. 1.
The class action suit was first brought against Helbiz, its CEO Salvatore Palella, and its partners in 2020, with an amended complaint filed in March 2022.
The case involves an Italian electric scooter-sharing company HelBiz that raised $38.6 million in an ICO and issued an ERC-20 token with one of the founders of Ethereum, Anthony Di Iorio, in 2018, according to the complaint.
A group of investors, numbering as many as 20,000, alleged that HelbizCoin was a rug pull and fraudulent pump-and-dump scheme with the firm making false statements and promises to induce people to purchase the coins. They claimed that Helbiz kept most of the money from the ICO for itself.
On Sept. 1, the US District Court for the Southern District of New York partially ruled in favor of investors who filed the class action suit, with the court granting the motions to dismiss in part and denied them in part.
Screenshot from court ruling shared with Cointelegraph
The court however dismissed all claims against certain defendants entirely, including Paysafe, Skrill, Decentral, and Alphabit, finding a lack of personal jurisdiction over Paysafe and Alphabit. The court also dismissed some claims against the remaining defendants for failure to state a claim, including breach of contract, tortious interference, and certain securities claims.
However, Judge Louis Stanton also ruled that plaintiffs adequately stated claims for fraud, price manipulation, violations of securities laws, commodities laws, the RICO (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations) Act, and unjust enrichment against some defendants.
“Among other matters, the case found that the ERC-20 token is a security under federal law,” the investor’s lawyer Michael Kanovitz told Cointelegraph.
The investors’ lawsuit was initially dismissed by a lower court judge in January 2021, citing a 2010 Supreme Court precedent that limited the extraterritorial reach of federal securities laws, according to a report from Reuters.
However, the case was revived in October 2021 when a 2nd U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals found the lower court judge erred in its decision, and an amended complaint was filed in March 2022.
In emailed comments to Cointelegraph, Kanovitz also pointed out that the complaint included a number of charts that use the Ethereum ledger to “prove spoof trading in the ICO.” It also included evidence of multiple “genesis wallets” that were provided to the initial investors in Ethereum, such as Mr. Di Iorio, he said before adding:
“It is a compelling story that shows how blockchain transparency can be used to flush out criminals.”
The complaint alleged that Di Iorio, an advisor to Helbiz, published false and misleading statements about the HelbizCoin ICO in Bitcoin Magazine but did not provide evidence that he made the statements.
“This is a speculative conclusion at best and thus fails to adequately allege that Di Iorio made false or misleading statements,” the ruling read.
The UK has floated a new tax framework that eases the burden on decentralized finance (DeFi) users, with deferred capital gains taxes on crypto lending and liquidity pool users until the underlying token is sold, which the local industry has welcomed.
HM Revenue and Customs (HMRC) proposed on Wednesday a “no gain, no loss” approach to DeFi that would cover lending out a token and receiving the same type back, borrowing arrangements and moving tokens into a liquidity pool.
Taxable gains or losses would be calculated when liquidity tokens are redeemed, based on the number of tokens a user receives back compared to the number they originally contributed, according to the proposal.
Currently, when a user deposits funds into a protocol, regardless of the reason, the move may be subject to capital gains tax. In the UK, capital gains tax rates can vary between 18% and 32%, depending on the action.
Tax framework a ‘positive signal’ for UK crypto regulation
Sian Morton, marketing lead at the crosschain payments system Relay protocol, said HMRC’s no gain, no loss approach is a “meaningful step forward for UK DeFi users who borrow stablecoins against their crypto collateral, and moves tax treatment closer to the actual economic reality of these interactions.”
“A positive signal for the UK’s evolving stance on crypto regulation,” she added.
Maria Riivari, a lawyer at the DeFi platform Aave, said the change “would bring clarity that DeFi transactions do not trigger tax until you truly sell your tokens.”
“Other countries facing similar questions may want to take note of HMRC’s approach and the depth of research and consideration behind it,” she added.
However, the proposal is not a done deal yet. HMRC said it’s continuing to engage with relevant stakeholders “to assess the merits of this potential approach, and the case for making legislative change to the rules governing the taxation of crypto asset loans and liquidity pools.”
“In particular, to ensure that it would cover the range of transactions that can take place under these arrangements and would be viable for individuals to comply with,” the agency added.
In the initial consultation, 32 formal written responses were submitted by individuals, businesses, tax professionals and representative bodies, which included crypto exchange Binance, venture capital firm a16z Capital Management and self-regulatory trade association Crypto UK.
Rachel Reeves needs to “make the case” to voters that extending the freeze on personal income thresholds was the “fairest” way to increase taxes, Baroness Harriet Harman has said.
Speaking to Sky News political editor Beth Rigby on the Electoral Dysfunction podcast, the Labour peer said the chancellor needed to explain that her decision would “protect people’s cost of living if they’re on low incomes”.
In her budget on Wednesday, Ms Reeves extended the freeze on income tax thresholds – introduced by the Conservatives in 2021 and due to expire in 2028 – by three years.
The move – described by critics as a “stealth tax” – is estimated to raise £8bn for the exchequer in 2029-2030 by dragging some 1.7 million people into a higher tax band as their pay goes up.
Image: Rachel Reeves, pictured the day after delivering the budget. Pic: PA
The chancellor previously said she would not freeze thresholds as it would “hurt working people” – prompting accusations she has broken the trust of voters.
During the general election campaign, Labour promised not to increase VAT, national insurance or income tax rates.
He has also launched a staunch defence of the government’s decision to scrap the two-child benefit cap, with its estimated cost of around £3bn by the end of this parliament.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:30
Prime minister defends budget
‘A moral failure’
The prime minister condemned the Conservative policy as a “failed social experiment” and said those who defend it stand for “a moral failure and an economic disaster”.
“The record highs of child poverty in this country aren’t just numbers on a spreadsheet – they mean millions of children are going to bed hungry, falling behind at school, and growing up believing that a better future is out of reach despite their parents doing everything right,” he said.
The two-child limit restricts child tax credit and universal credit to the first two children in most households.
The government believes lifting the limit will pull 450,000 children out of poverty, which it argues will ultimately help reduce costs by preventing knock-on issues like dependency on welfare – and help people find jobs.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
8:46
Budget winners and losers
Speaking to Rigby, Baroness Harman said Ms Reeves now needed to convince “the woman on the doorstep” of why she’s raised taxes in the way that she has.
“I think Rachel really answered it very, very clearly when she said, ‘well, actually, we haven’t broken the manifesto because the manifesto was about rates’.
“And you remember there was a big kerfuffle before the budget about whether they would increase the rate of income tax or the rate of national insurance, and they backed off that because that would have been a breach of the manifesto.
“But she has had to increase the tax take, and she’s done it by increasing by freezing the thresholds, which she says she didn’t want to do. But she’s tried to do it with the fairest possible way, with counterbalancing support for people on low incomes.”
She added: “And that is the argument that’s now got to be had with the public. The Labour members of parliament are happy about it. The markets essentially are happy about it. But she needs to make the case, and everybody in the government is going to need to make the case about it.
“This was a difficult thing to do, but it’s been done in the fairest possible way, and it’s for the good, because it will protect people’s cost of living if they’re on low incomes.”
With all the speculation, it was always going to be a big one, but Rachel Reeves’s second budget turned into a political earthquake before she even stood up at the despatch box.
In this bumper budget special, Beth, Ruth, and Harriet unpick what happened on one of the most dramatic days in the fiscal calendar.
With the unprecedented leak of the Office for Budget Responsibility’s assessment giving the opposition a sneak preview, Kemi Badenoch delivered a fiery attack. Listeners weigh in on their thoughts of her comebacks.
Send us your messages and Christmas-themed questions on WhatsApp at 07934 200 444 or email electoraldysfunction@sky.uk.
And if you didn’t know, you can also watch Beth, Harriet, and Ruth on YouTube.
St. James’s Place sponsors Electoral Dysfunction on Sky News, learn more here.