Judge rejects SEC’s motion to file an appeal against Ripple ruling
District court judge Analisa Torres has rejected the United States Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) motion to appeal its loss against Ripple Labs, the company responsible for issuing the XRP (XRP) token.
In an Oct. 3 court order, Judge Torres denied the SEC’s motion, claiming that regulator failed to meet its burden to show that there were controlling questions of law or that there were substantial grounds for differences of opinion on the matter.
“The SEC’s motion for certification of interlocutory appeal is denied, and the SEC’s request for a stay is denied as moot.”
Notably, the decision isn’t an outright loss for the regulator, as judge Torres scheduled a trial for April 23, 2024 to address the remaining issues on the matter.
The price of XRP surged nearly 6% immediately following the news, according to data from TradingView.
On July 13, Judge Torres ruled partially in favor of Ripple, declaring that retail sales of the XRP token did not meet the legal definition of a security. The court did find however, that Ripple had violated securities laws by selling XRP tokens directly to institutional investors.
Following the ruling, the SEC announced that it would be seeking an appeal of the decision, writing in a seperate lawsuit that certain portions of the case were “wrongly decided” and that it would be seeking further review.
Ripple Labs and the SEC but did not provide an immediate response to request for comment by Cointelegraph at the time of publication.
This is a developing story, and further information will be added as it becomes available.
After nearly a year of legal proceedings, a South Korean court acquitted former Wemade CEO Jang Hyun-guk of market manipulation charges.
Are Rachel Reeves’s fiscal rules quite as iron clad as she insists?
How tough is her armour really? And is there actually scope for some change, some loosening to avoid big tax hikes in the autumn?
We’ve had a bit of clarity early this morning – and that’s a question we discuss on the Politics at Sam and Anne’s podcast today.
Politics Live: Reeves to reform financial regulations
And tens of billions of pounds of borrowing depends on the answer – which still feels intriguingly opaque.
You might think you know what the fiscal rules are. And you might think you know they’re not negotiable.
For instance, the main fiscal rule says that from 2029-30, the government’s day-to-day spending needs to be in surplus – i.e. rely on taxation alone, not borrowing.
And Rachel Reeves has been clear – that’s not going to change, and there’s no disputing this.
But when the government announced its fiscal rules in October, it actually published a 19-page document – a “charter” – alongside this.
And this contains all sorts of notes and caveats. And it’s slightly unclear which are subject to the “iron clad” promise – and which aren’t.
There’s one part of that document coming into focus – with sources telling me that it could get changed.
And it’s this – a little-known buffer built into the rules.
It’s outlined in paragraph 3.6 on page four of the Charter for Budget Responsibility.
This says that from spring 2027, if the OBR forecasts that she still actually has a deficit of up to 0.5% of GDP in three years, she will still be judged to be within the rules.
In other words, if in spring 2027 she’s judged to have missed her fiscal rules by perhaps as much as £15bn, that’s fine.
A change could save the chancellor some headaches. Pic: PA
Now there’s a caveat – this exemption only applies, providing at the following budget the chancellor reduces that deficit back to zero.
But still, it’s potentially helpful wiggle room.
This help – this buffer – for Reeves doesn’t apply today, or for the next couple of years – it only kicks in from the spring of 2027.
But I’m being told by a source that some of this might change and the ability to use this wiggle room could be brought forward to this year. Could she give herself a get out of jail card?
The chancellor could gamble that few people would notice this technical change, and it might avoid politically catastrophic tax hikes – but only if the markets accept it will mean higher borrowing than planned.
But the question is – has Rachel Reeves ruled this out by saying her fiscal rules are iron clad or not?
Or to put it another way… is the whole of the 19-page Charter for Budget Responsibility “iron clad” and untouchable, or just the rules themselves?
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
Is Labour plotting a ‘wealth tax’?
And what counts as “rules” and are therefore untouchable, and what could fall outside and could still be changed?
I’ve been pressing the Treasury for a statement.
And this morning, they issued one.
A spokesman said: “The fiscal rules as set out in the Charter for Budget Responsibility are iron clad, and non-negotiable, as are the definition of the rules set out in the document itself.”
So that sounds clear – but what is a definition of the rule? Does it include this 0.5% of GDP buffer zone?
Read more:
Reeves hints at tax rises in autumn
Tough decisions ahead for chancellor
The Treasury does concede that not everything in the charter is untouchable – including the role and remit of the OBR, and the requirements for it to publish a specific list of fiscal metrics.
But does that include that key bit? Which bits can Reeves still tinker with?
I’m still unsure that change has been ruled out.
The Justice Department says two LA Sheriff deputies admitted to helping extort victims, including for a local crypto mogul, while working their private security side hustles.
-
Sports3 years ago‘Storybook stuff’: Inside the night Bryce Harper sent the Phillies to the World Series
-
Sports1 year agoStory injured on diving stop, exits Red Sox game
-
Sports2 years agoGame 1 of WS least-watched in recorded history
-
Sports2 years agoMLB Rank 2023: Ranking baseball’s top 100 players
-
Sports4 years ago
Team Europe easily wins 4th straight Laver Cup
-
Sports2 years agoButton battles heat exhaustion in NASCAR debut
-
Environment2 years agoJapan and South Korea have a lot at stake in a free and open South China Sea
-
Environment2 years agoGame-changing Lectric XPedition launched as affordable electric cargo bike