A group of Tornado Cash users has filed an appeal in federal court following a ruling upholding the United States Treasury Department’s decision to add the cryptocurrency mixer to its list of sanctioned entities.
In a Nov. 13 filing in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit, lawyers representing plaintiffs Joseph Van Loon, Tyler Almeida, Alexander Fisher, Preston Van Loon, Kevin Vitale and Nate Welch argued that the U.S. Treasury “stretched [its] authority beyond recognition” in sanctioning Tornado Cash transactions. The filing came in response to an August decision by a Texas federal judge who ruled the crypto mixer could be sanctioned under the regulatory purview of Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control.
“The district court erred by concluding that the Department satisfied three of the requirements for a designation under [International Emergency Economic Powers Act] and the North Korea Act,” said the Nov. 13 filing. “The Department’s action is contrary to law and in excess of statutory authority under the Administrative Procedure Act.”
According to the plaintiffs, smart contracts under Tornado Cash identified in the lawsuit were “immutable and ownerless” and failed to meet the U.S. Treasury’s regulatory definition of “property” subject to sanctions. The appeal also challenged the Treasury’s definition of “interest,” claiming Tornado Cash has no “legal, equitable, or beneficial interest” in users’ smart contracts.
The filing was the latest legal move in a lawsuit first filed by the six individuals in September 2022. The U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control added Tornado Cash to its Specially Designated Nationals list in August 2022, prompting criticism and outrage from many in the space.
Coinbase chief legal officer Paul Grewal said in a Nov. 13 X (formerly Twiter) thread that he supported the efforts of the plaintiffs, saying the appellate court would carefully consider the filing. The crypto exchange has been publicly supporting Van Loon and the other plaintiffs since the September 2022 lawsuit.
Ordinary Americans do extraordinary and admirable things. With the support of @coinbase and many others, today the Loon plaintiffs took their case to the 5th Cir. to challenge sanctions against the ownerless, immutable software known as Tornado Cash. https://t.co/jALDHx950v 1/6
Crypto advocacy group Coin Center, which filed its own lawsuit against the U.S. Treasury over Tornado Cash in October 2022, similarly lost its case in Florida federal court. The group filed an appeal in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit on Nov. 6.
U.S. authorities have also pursued criminal charges against individuals involved with Tornado Cash. In August, the Justice Department charged co-founders Roman Storm and Roman Semenov with conspiracy to commit money laundering, conspiracy to commit sanctions violations and conspiracy to operate an unlicensed money-transmitting business.
Storm was released on a $2-million bond following his arrest and pleaded not guilty to all charges in September, while Semenov was not in custody at the time of publication. Authorities in the Netherlands arrested Tornado Cash co-founder Alexey Pertsev for similar charges related to money laundering in August 2022. He was released in April 2023 to await trial.
Cryptocurrency firms felt the heat from US President Donald Trump’s sweeping tariff rollout this week as market turbulence sent share prices tumbling and foiled initial public offering (IPO) plans.
From exchanges to Bitcoin (BTC) miners, crypto stocks suffered as much, if not more, than shares of other companies — despite the industry’s warm relationship with the US president.
On April 2, Trump announced he was placing tariffs of at least 10% on practically all imports into the United States and adding additional “reciprocal” tariffs on some 57 countries.
Since then, major US stock indices — including the S&P 500 and Nasdaq — tumbled by roughly 10% as traders braced for a looming trade war.
Bitcoin miners sold off on Trump’s tariff news. Source: Morningstar
Crypto exchange Coinbase — a prominent ally of Trump during the November US elections — experienced a similarly severe sell-off, with its stock price dropping by roughly 12% during the same period, according to data from Google Finance.
Bitcoin miners are also taking a hit. The CoinShares Crypto Miners ETF (WGMI) — which tracks a diverse basket of Bitcoin mining stocks — has lost roughly 13% of its value since immediately prior to Trump’s April 2 announcement, according to data from Morningstar.
Even Strategy, one of the best-performing stocks of 2024, wasn’t immune. Its share price has fallen by around 6% on the news, Google Finance data showed.
According to Reuters, investment bank JPMorgan has raised its estimated odds of a global economic recession in 2025 to 60% from 40% previously.
“Disruptive U.S. policies have been recognized as the biggest risk to the global outlook all year,” JP Morgan reportedly said.
“The effect … is likely to be magnified through (tariff) retaliation, a slide in U.S. business sentiment and supply-chain disruptions.”
Strategy’s shares also dropped this week. Source: Google Finance
IPO delays
The impact of US tariffs hasn’t been limited to stock price volatility. Stablecoin issuer Circle has reportedly paused plans for a 2025 IPO, citing market turbulence.
According to The Wall Street Journal, Circle is “waiting anxiously” before taking further steps after filing to take the company public on April 1.
It is among several companies — including fintech Klarna and ticketing service StubHub — reportedly considering altering or shelving IPO plans.
Brazilian judges have been authorized to seize cryptocurrency assets from debtors who owe money and are behind on their payments, signaling a growing recognition that digital assets can be both a form of payment and a store of value.
According to local media reports, the Third Panel of Brazil’s Superior Court of Justice unanimously authorized judges to send letters to cryptocurrency brokers informing them about their intent to seize an account holder’s assets to repay creditors.
The report was confirmed by the Superior Court of Justice, which issued a notice on its website.
The decision was reached unanimously by the Third Panel, which reviewed a case brought forward by a creditor.
“Although they are not legal tender, crypto assets can be used as a form of payment and as a store of value,” a translated version of the Superior Court of Justice’s memo read.
Under existing rules, Brazilian judges are allowed to freeze bank accounts and order fund withdrawals, even without a debtor’s knowledge, should they rule that a creditor is owed money.
Following the recent decision, crypto assets now fall under the same purview.
Minister Ricardo Villas Bôas Cueva, who voted in the five-person panel, said cryptocurrencies still lack formal regulation in Brazil but noted certain bills have recognized the asset class as “a digital representation of value.”
Despite regulatory uncertainty, Brazil is a major hub for crypto
Although Brazil still lacks an overarching framework for digital assets, with the country’s central bank divvying up the regulatory processes into phases, crypto adoption is surging across the country.
Brazil ranks second among all Latin American countries in terms of “crypto value received,” which is a key benchmark for adoption, according to an October report by Chainalysis.
In Latin America, only Argentina has higher crypto penetration in terms of value received as of June 2024. Source: Chainalysis
A Binance executive told Cointelegraph at the time that Brazil was making “significant strides” in regulating the industry and expects a comprehensive framework to be finalized “by mid-year.”
Nevertheless, not all of Brazil’s regulatory proposals have been favorable for the industry.
In December, the country’s central bank proposed banning stablecoin transactions on self-custodial wallets at a time when more locals were using dollar-pegged tokens to hedge against the devaluation of the Brazilian real.
Industry observers told Cointelegraph at the time that such a ban would be difficult to enforce.
“Governments can regulate centralized exchanges, but P2P transactions and decentralized platforms are much harder to control, which means the ban would likely only affect part of the ecosystem,” said Lucien Bourdon, an analyst with Trezor.
Sir Keir Starmer needs to choose between parents who want stronger action to tackle harmful content on children’s phones, or the “tech bros” who are resisting changes to their platforms, Baroness Harriet Harman has said.
Speaking to Beth Rigby on Sky News’ Electoral Dysfunction podcast, the Labour peer noted that the prime minister met with the creators of hit Netflix drama Adolescence to discuss safety on social media, but she questioned if he is going to take action to “stop the tech companies allowing this sort of stuff” on their platforms where children can access it.
Sir Keir hosted a roundtable on Monday with Adolescence co-writer Jack Thorne and producer Jo Johnson to discuss issues raised in the series, which centres on a 13-year-old boy arrested for the murder of a young girl, and the rise of incel culture.
The aim was to discuss how to prevent young boys being dragged into a “whirlpool of hatred and misogyny”, and the prime minister said the four-part series raises questions about how to keep young people safe from technology.
Sir Keir has backed calls for the four-part drama to be shown in all schools across the country, but Baroness Harman questioned what is going to be achieved by having young people simply watch the show.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:15
Sir Keir Starmer held a roundtable with the creators of the Adolescence TV drama.
“Two questions were raised [for me],” she said. ” Firstly – after they’ve watched it, what is going to be the discussion afterwards?
More on Electoral Dysfunction
Related Topics:
“And secondly, is he going to act to stop the tech companies allowing this sort of stuff to go online into smartphones without protection of children?
“Because if the tech companies wanted to do this, they could actually protect children. They can do everything they want with their tech.”
She acknowledged there are “very big public policy challenges” in this area, but added of the prime minister: “Is he going to side with parents who are terrified and want this content off their children’s phones, or is he going to accept the tech bros’ resistance to having to make changes?”
The Labour peer backed the Conservative Party’s call for a ban on smartphones in schools to be mandated from Westminster, saying it would “enable all schools not to have a discussion with their parents or to battle it out, but just to say, this is the ruling” from central government, which Ofsted would then enforce.
“I’m sensitive to the idea that we shouldn’t constantly be telling schools what to do,” she continued. “And they’ve got a lot of common sense and a lot of professional experience, and they should have as much autonomy as possible.
“But perhaps it’s easier for them if it’s done top down.”
Baroness Harman also questioned the speed with which parliament is actually able to legislate to deal with the very rapid development of new technologies, and posits that it could “change its processes to be able to legislate in real time”.
She suggested that a “powerful select committee” of MPs could be established to do that, because “otherwise we talk about it, and then we’re not able to legislate for 10 years – by which time that problem has really set in, and we’ve got a whole load more problems”.
On the podcast, the trio also discussed the 10% tariffs imposed on the UK by Donald Trump and the government’s efforts to strike a trade deal with the US to mitigate the impact of the levy.
The government has refused to rule out scrapping the Digital Services Tax, a 2% levy on tech giants’ revenues in the UK, as part of the negotiations with the Trump administration – a move Baroness Harman said would be “very heartbreaking”.