Officials with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission are reportedly discussing aspects of Bitcoin (BTC) exchange-traded funds, or ETFs, proposed by asset managers.
According to a Dec. 7 Reuters report, industry insiders said the SEC and certain asset managers were discussing “key technical details” related to U.S. exchanges listing shares of a spot Bitcoin ETF. To date, the commission has never given the green light to any spot cryptocurrency exchange-traded product, instead postponing decisions on applications for the maximum allowable time.
Memos released by the SEC in November showed the commission separately met with representatives of BlackRock and Grayscale. Both asset managers and Hashdex, ARK 21Shares, Invesco Galaxy, VanEck and Fidelity have filed for spot BTC or Ether (ETH) ETF listings.
“The expected approval of the ETF will be positive news for the crypto market, likely leading to significant growth,” said Mercuryo senior legal counsel Adam Berker. “With ETFs getting the go-ahead, a wider range of TradFi investors will have simplified access to crypto assets. With major entities such as Fidelity and BlackRock endorsing this product, substantial institutional capital is expected to flow into the market.”
It’s unclear whether the SEC will ultimately reach a decision to approve a spot Bitcoin ETF. Bloomberg ETF analyst James Seyffart speculated that should the commission decide to support one, it could move forward with simultaneous approvals of funds from multiple firms in January.
Many in and out of the crypto space have criticized SEC Chair Gary Gensler for his approach to treating certain tokens as securities. The commission has ongoing lawsuits against Terraform Labs, Ripple, Coinbase and Binance.
Campaigners have criticised a change to the rules around declarations of interest in the House of Lords as a “retrograde step” which will lead to a “significant loss of transparency”.
Since 2000, peers have had to register a list of “non-financial interests” – which includes declaring unpaid but often important roles like being a director, trustee, or chair of a company, think tank or charity.
But that requirement was dropped in April despite staff concerns.
Tom Brake, director of Unlock Democracy, and a former Liberal Democrat MP, wants to see the decision reversed.
“It’s a retrograde step,” he said. “I think we’ve got a significant loss of transparency and accountability and that is bad news for the public.
“More than 25 years ago, the Committee on Standards in Public Life identified that there was a need for peers to register non-financial interests because that could influence their decisions. I’m confused as to what’s happened in the last 25 years that now means this requirement can be scrapped.
“This process seems to be all about making matters simpler for peers, rather than what the code of conduct is supposed to do, which is to boost the public’s confidence.”
Image: MPs and peers alike have long faced scrutiny over their interests outside Westminster. File pic
Rules were too ‘burdensome’, say peers
The change was part of an overhaul of the code of conduct which aimed to “shorten and clarify” the rules for peers.
The House of Lords Conduct Committee argued that updating non-financial interests was “disproportionately burdensome” with “minor and inadvertent errors” causing “large numbers of complaints”.
As a result, the register of Lords interests shrunk in size from 432 pages to 275.
MPs have a different code of conduct, which requires them to declare any formal unpaid positions or other non-financial interests which may be an influence.
A source told Sky News there is real concern among some Lords’ staff about the implications of the change.
Non-financial interest declarations have previously highlighted cases where a peer’s involvement in a think tank or lobbying group overlapped with a paid role.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
4:23
Protesters disrupt House of Lords
Cricket legend among peers to breach code
There are also examples where a peer’s non-financial interest declaration has prompted an investigation – revealing a financial interest which should have been declared instead.
In 2023, Lord Skidelsky was found to have breached the code after registering his role as chair of a charity’s trustees as a non-financial interest.
Image: Lord Skidelsky. Pic: UK Parliament
The Commissioner for Standards investigated after questions were raised about the charity, the Centre for Global Studies.
He concluded that the charity – which was funded by two Russian businessmen – only existed to support Lord Skidelsky’s work, and had paid his staff’s salaries for over 12 years.
In 2021, Lord Botham – the England cricket legend – was found to have breached the code after registering a non-financial interest as an unpaid company director.
The company’s accounts subsequently revealed he and his wife had benefitted from a director’s loan of nearly £200,000. It was considered a minor breach and he apologised.
Image: Former cricketer Lord Botham. File pic: PA
‘Follow the money’
Lord Eric Pickles, the former chair of the anti-corruption watchdog, the Advisory Committee on Business Appointments, believes focusing on financial interests makes the register more transparent.
“My view is always to follow the money. Everything else on a register is camouflage,” he said.
“Restricting the register to financial reward will give peers little wriggle room. I know this is counterintuitive, but the less there is on the register, the more scrutiny there will be on the crucial things.”
Image: Lord Eric Pickles
‘I was shocked’
The SNP want the House of Lords to be scrapped, and has no peers of its own. Deputy Westminster leader Pete Wishart MP is deeply concerned by the changes.
“I was actually quite horrified and quite shocked,” he said.
“This is an institution that’s got no democratic accountability, it’s a job for life. If anything, members of the House of Lords should be regulated and judged by a higher standard than us in the House of Commons – and what’s happened is exactly the opposite.”
Image: Michelle Mone attends the state opening of parliament in 2019. Pic: Reuters
The government has pledged to reform the House of Lords and is currently trying to push through a bill abolishing the 92 remaining hereditary peers, which will return to the House of Commons in September.
But just before recess the bill was amended in the Lords so that they can remain as members until retirement or death. It’s a change which is unlikely to be supported by MPs.
Image: MPs and peers alike have long faced scrutiny over their interests outside Westminster. File pic
A spokesperson for the House of Lords said: “Maintaining public confidence in the House of Lords is a key objective of the code of conduct. To ensure that, the code includes rigorous rules requiring the registration and declaration of all relevant financial interests held by members of the House of Lords.
“Public confidence relies, above all, on transparency over the financial interests that may influence members’ conduct. This change helps ensure the rules regarding registration of interests are understandable, enforceable and focused on the key areas of public concern.
“Members may still declare non-financial interests in debate, where they consider them directly relevant, to inform the House and wider public.
“The Conduct Committee is appointed to review the code of conduct, and it will continue to keep all issues under review. During its review of the code of conduct, the committee considered written evidence from both Unlock Democracy and Transparency International UK, among others.”
Federico Carrone, a privacy-focused Ethereum core developer, confirmed that he has been released after being accused by Turkish authorities of aiding the “misuse” of an Ethereum privacy protocol.
In January, the Terraform Labs co-founder pleaded not guilty to several charges, including securities fraud, market manipulation, money laundering and wire fraud.