Connect with us

Published

on

It seems that every time Massachusetts Senator Elizabeth Warren fails to get an anti-crypto bill passed, she introduces a new draft. She has the strategy of messaging bills — legislation introduced for the purposes of media attention and fundraising more than actual passage — down to a science.

Warren’s latest legislation, the Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act, threatens to undermine crypto’s core principles of freedom and personal sovereignty. While Warren argues that her bill is necessary to combat illicit activities, a closer look reveals its potential to stifle innovation, endanger user privacy and play right into the hands of big banks.

The bill, co-sponsored by Kansas Senator Roger Marshall, is based on the premise that digital assets are increasingly being used for criminal activities such as money laundering, ransomware attacks and terrorist financing. While some bad actors exploit digital assets, the bill’s approach of treating all developers and wallet providers as potential criminals is not only impractical but also dangerous.

Related: The SEC is facing another defeat in its recycled lawsuit against Kraken

The most dangerous part of the bill is the requirement that digital asset developers comply with Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) responsibilities and Know Your Customer (KYC) requirements. This effectively places the burden of law enforcement on the shoulders of software developers. It’s akin to requiring car manufacturers to be responsible for how their vehicles are used on the road.

The Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2023

The bill further seeks to eliminate privacy tools that protect crypto users from malicious actors. By cracking down on digital asset mixers and anonymity-enhancing technologies, Warren’s proposal threatens the privacy rights of law-abiding citizens. It’s essential to remember that privacy is a fundamental right, not a privilege that can be discarded at will. A number of early Bitcoin (BTC) millionaires have been kidnapped and tortured as a direct result of the transparency of the Bitcoin blockchain. Warren would leave future Bitcoiners defenseless against such threats.

While she claims to be acting in the name of national security, it’s worth noting that the big banks would benefit greatly from limiting the competition posed by cryptocurrencies. By imposing onerous regulations, the bill would make it difficult for crypto to compete on a level playing field.

But what about the argument that digital assets are being used by rogue nations and criminal organizations? While this is a valid concern, it’s crucial to distinguish between the technology itself and the actions of a few. The same argument could be applied to cash, which has been used for illegal activities for centuries. Banning cash would be an overreaction, just as overly restrictive crypto regulations are.

One major concern is the bill’s approach to “unhosted” digital wallets, which allow individuals to bypass Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and sanctions checks. While preventing illicit transactions is crucial, the bill’s proposed rule to require banks and money service businesses to verify customer identities and file reports on certain transactions involving unhosted wallets may have unintended consequences.

Forcing individuals to provide personal information for every transaction goes against the very principles that have drawn people to cryptocurrencies — privacy and pseudonymity. It’s important to strike a balance between security and individual rights. Overregulation could drive users away from regulated platforms, pushing them into unregulated, more challenging-to-track environments.

Additionally, the bill’s focus on directing the United States Financial Crimes Enforcement Network to issue guidance on mitigating the risks of handling anonymized digital assets seems to misunderstand the core tenets of blockchain technology. Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin are designed to be transparent yet pseudonymous. Trying to eliminate this pseudonymity jeopardizes one of the key features that make blockchain secure and appealing to users.

Related: BRC-20 tokens are presenting new opportunities for Bitcoin buyers

Another significant issue is the potential overreach in extending BSA rules to include digital assets. Requiring individuals engaged in transactions over $10,000 in digital assets through offshore accounts to file a Report of Foreign Bank and Financial Accounts (FBAR) may be excessive. It could result in unnecessary burdens on individuals who use digital assets for legitimate purposes, such as cross-border remittances or investments.

Warren’s bill is a sledgehammer approach to a nuanced problem. Rather than stifling innovation and privacy, a more balanced approach would be to target specific criminal activities and individuals. The current AML system, which large crypto exchanges comply with, has been effective at interdicting illicit crypto usage, which is why isolated instances have been reported.

The Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act is a deeply flawed piece of legislation. Warren’s bill poses a real threat to the crypto community and risks playing right into the hands of big banks. It’s essential that we find a more balanced and effective solution that addresses the concerns without stifling the potential of this transformative technology.

J.W. Verret is an associate professor at George Mason University’s Antonin Scalia Law School. He is a practicing crypto forensic accountant and also practices securities law at Lawrence Law LLC. He is a member of the Financial Accounting Standards Board’s Advisory Council and a former member of the SEC Investor Advisory Committee. He also leads the Crypto Freedom Lab, a think tank fighting for policy change to preserve freedom and privacy for crypto developers and users.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

Continue Reading

Politics

Shouts of ‘genocide’ in Commons as David Lammy denounces Israel’s ‘intolerable’ actions in Gaza

Published

on

By

Shouts of 'genocide' in Commons as David Lammy denounces Israel's 'intolerable' actions in Gaza

The foreign secretary has denounced Israel’s actions in Gaza as “intolerable” but stopped short of saying it had committed genocide.

MPs could be heard shouting “genocide” in the Commons chamber as David Lammy announced the government was suspending its trade negotiations with Israel and summoning Tzipi Hotovely, Israel’s ambassador to the UK, to the Foreign Office.

The UK has also sanctioned a number of individuals and groups in the West Bank which it says have been linked with acts of violence against Palestinians – including Daniella Weiss, a leading settler activist who was the subject of Louis Theroux’s recent documentary The Settlers.

Politics latest: Starmer says sorry for being ‘overly rude’ at PMQs

Israel immediately criticised the UK government actions as “regrettable” and said the free trade agreement talks, which ministers have now backed out of, were “not being advanced at all by the UK government”.

Oren Marmorstein, a spokesperson for the Israeli foreign affairs ministry, said: “If, due to anti-Israel obsession and domestic political considerations, the British government is willing to harm the British economy – that is its own prerogative.”

Mr Lammy’s intervention came in response to Israel ramping up its latest military offensive in Gaza and its decision to limit the amount of aid into the enclave.

Tom Fletcher, head of the UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs, accused Israel of “deliberately and unashamedly” imposing inhumane conditions on Palestinians by blocking aid from entering Gaza more than 10 weeks ago.

He also told the UN’s security council last week that it must “act now” to “prevent genocide” – a claim that Israel has vehemently denied.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Aftermath of strike on Gaza school-turned-shelter

Speaking in the Commons, the foreign secretary said the threat of starvation was “hanging over hundreds of thousands of civilians” and that the 11-week blockade stopping humanitarian aid reaching Gaza was “indefensible and cruel”.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has agreed to allow a limited amount of aid into the besieged enclave in response to global concern at reports of famine.

Mr Lammy said Mr Netanyahu’s govenrment was “isolating Israel from its friends and partners around the world, undermining the interests of the Israeli people and damaging the image of the state of Israel in the eyes of the world”.

“We are now entering a dark new phase in this conflict,” Mr Lammy added.

“Netanyahu’s government is planning to drive Gazans from their homes into a corner of the strip to the south and permit them a fraction of the aid that they need.”

Referring to one of the far-right ministers in Mr Netanyahu’s government, he said Bezalel Smotrich “even spoke of Israeli forces cleansing Gaza, destroying what’s left of residents, Palestinians being relocated, he said, to third countries”.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Surgeon compares Gaza to ‘killing fields’

MPs from across the house shouted “genocide” as Mr Lammy said: “We must call this what it is. It is extremism. It is dangerous. It is repellent. It is monstrous and I condemn it in the strongest possible terms.”

In the Commons, a number of Labour MPs urged the government to go further against Israel.

Yasmin Qureshi, the Labour MP for Bolton South and Walkden, said there needed to be a “full arms embargo” and said: “Can I ask the foreign secretary what additional steps he’s going to be taking in order to stave off this genocide?”

Another Labour MP told Sky News that while the statement was “better than previously…without a concrete timeline and a sanctioning of responsible ministers, it’s hard to know what tangible difference it will make.”

Read more:
British surgeon in Gaza says it is now ‘a slaughterhouse’
Gaza at mercy of what comes next – analysis
How Israel has escalated Gaza bombing campaign

Follow The World
Follow The World

Listen to The World with Richard Engel and Yalda Hakim every Wednesday

Tap to follow

Israeli officials have said its plans to seize all of Gaza and hold it indefinitely. – which would move the civilian population southward – will help it achieve its aim of defeating Hamas.

Israel also believes the offensive will prevent Hamas from looting and distributing humanitarian aid, which it says strengthens the group’s rule in Gaza.

Mr Netanyahu has defended Israel’s actions in Gaza and reacted angrily to a joint statement penned by the leaders of the UK, France and Canada, in which they urged Israel to end its military offensive in Gaza and lift restrictions on humanitarian aid allowed into the enclave.

The Israeli prime minister said: “By asking Israel to end a defensive war for our survival before Hamas terrorists on our border are destroyed and by demanding a Palestinian state, the leaders in London, Ottawa and Paris are offering a huge prize for the genocidal attack on Israel on October 7 while inviting more such atrocities.

“No nation can be expected to accept anything less and Israel certainly won’t. This is a war of civilisation over barbarism. Israel will continue to defend itself by just means until total victory is achieved.”

Continue Reading

Politics

SEC crypto task force to release first report ‘in the next few months’

Published

on

By

<div>SEC crypto task force to release first report 'in the next few months'</div>

<div>SEC crypto task force to release first report 'in the next few months'</div>

US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Paul Atkins appeared before lawmakers in one of his first hearings since becoming chair of the financial regulator, addressing questions about his plans for the cryptocurrency industry.

In a May 20 hearing discussing oversight of the SEC, Atkins reiterated his pledge to make regulating digital assets a “key priority” while chair. In response to questions from North Carolina Representative Chuck Edwards, the SEC chair did not directly answer how much of the regulator’s funds were used to support the crypto task force headed by Commissioner Hester Peirce, and said its findings were “still under development.”

“We should be having something here in the next few months with proposed steps forward,” said Atkins in response to the task force’s first report. 

Cryptocurrencies, Government, SEC, United States
Paul Atkins at a May 20 SEC oversight hearing. Source: House Appropriations Committee

The SEC chair’s appearance at the oversight hearing was one of his first since being sworn into office in April. Nominated by Donald Trump, Atkins, also a former commissioner, was seen by many lawmakers and those in the digital asset industry as someone who could radically change the SEC’s approach to crypto. 

Looking to Congress for help with regulatory clarity

Atkins’ remarks came less than 24 hours after US Senators voted to move forward on consideration of a bill to regulate stablecoins, the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins Act, or GENIUS Act. The bill is one of many related to aspects of digital assets that could affect how the SEC regulates the industry alongside agencies like the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

“Whatever happens in Congress […] that will help undergird what we do,” said Atkins.

Related: Paul Atkins: ‘Crypto markets have been languishing in SEC limbo

Since being sworn into office in April, the SEC chair has given opening remarks and overseen the commission’s roundtable events on digital assets. The next event, scheduled for June 9, will have SEC commissioners and industry leaders discuss issues related to decentralized finance.

Magazine: SEC’s U-turn on crypto leaves key questions unanswered

Continue Reading

Politics

Suspension of trade talks a political signal that Israeli leadership is increasingly isolated

Published

on

By

Suspension of trade talks a political signal that Israeli leadership is increasingly isolated

The UK has suspended trade talks with Israel, in protest at what David Lammy called the “intolerable” conditions in Gaza, which he said would leave the population at risk of starvation.

This is, the foreign office confirms, a UK first, in suspending trade talks for a political or humanitarian reason. The Israeli ambassador in London, Tzipi Hotovely, will be summoned to the Foreign Office to deliver the message.

Politics live: PM apologises for being ‘overly rude’ at PMQs

This suspension, with immediate effect, is a political signal that the Israeli leadership is increasingly isolated even among its allies; and intended to ratchet up the pressure to let aid in.

It comes with a step change in the UK’s language on the humanitarian situation.

Keir Starmer on Monday night, in his joint statement with French President Emmanuel Macron and Canadian Prime Minister Mark Carney, said there would be “concrete steps” if food and medicine continued to be held up at borders; and this is one of the levers available.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Doctors in Gaza plead for help

David Lammy, announcing the move and targeted sanctions against West Bank settlers linked to violence, called it a “dark phase” in the conflict and said: “[Benjamin] Netanyahu’s actions have made this necessary.”

More on Israel-hamas War

Trade talks were launched under Rishi Sunak’s government, and a 2030 Roadmap was agreed for boosting trade.

Gaza live: UK halts trade talks with Israel

But although the Labour government committed to continuing with it, the last round of talks was held more than a year ago.

Israel has, the UN say, not allowed trucks in for 11 weeks, after saying Hamas steal the aid intended for civilians. Some trucks entered on Tuesday, but aid agencies say it is nowhere near enough.

With the collapse of the latest talks between the two sides in Qatar last week, the ceasefire the UK is calling for looks far off.

Using economic measures to force the aid issue is likely to be a signal to other allies, including the European Union, to take similar steps.

Continue Reading

Trending