A flag outside the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission headquarters in Washington, Feb. 23, 2022.
Al Drago | Bloomberg | Getty Images
Regulators around the world from Europe to Asia ramped up efforts to bring about formal laws for digital currencies in 2023 — but it was the U.S. that took some of the harshest legal actions against major players in the industry.
In a year that saw crypto heavyweight Binance ordered to pay more than $4 billion to U.S. authorities and its former CEO’s guilty plea, along with high-profile lawsuits against five crypto companies by the Securities and Exchange Commission, regulators overseas have been equally busy both adopting new legislation — and pushing for more — to rein in the sector’s bad actors.
Here’s the state of play globally for crypto regulation and enforcement in 2023 — and a look at what to expect in 2024.
U.S. tops the list globally for enforcement
The U.S. has proven to be one of the most active enforcers of penalties and legal action against crypto companies this year, as authorities looked to counter bad practices in the industry following the collapse of Sam Bankman-Fried’s crypto empire — including his FTX exchange and sister firm Alameda Research.
“To be clear, in some cases — like FTX — enforcement was necessary,” said Renato Mariotti, a former prosecutor in the U.S. Justice Department’s Securities and Commodities Fraud Section. “But U.S. enforcement actions against market participants that are more focused on compliance are questionable and the result of the U.S. ‘regulation by enforcement’ approach.”
While many regions have passed laws with potentially tough penalties, the U.S. is still the only country that has actively taken action against large-scale crypto companies and projects. Thus far, the U.S. has led that campaign against crypto firms by enforcement and has, by far, been the most punishing of regulators when it comes to penalties and fines.
“Other countries have a comprehensive regulatory framework in place. We don’t,” Mariotti told CNBC. “As a result, issues that should be determined by legislation or regulation are instead litigated.”
Indeed, in the absence of hard-and-fast rules from Capitol Hill, the SEC, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, the Department of Justice, and Treasury’s Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCen), have worked in parallel to police the space, in a sort of patch-quilt version of regulation-by-enforcement.
Richard Levin, a partner at Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough who has represented clients before the SEC, CFTC, and Congress, tells CNBC that these agencies have been some of the most active enforcers around the world concerning the regulation of digital assets and cryptocurrencies.
“These agencies have provided guidance to the industry on how digital assets and cryptocurrencies must be offered and sold, traded, and held by custodians,” said Levin, who has been involved in the fintech sector for 30 years.
“However, much of their work has involved providing guidance to the industry through enforcement actions,” continued Levin.
Since 2019, Justice’s Market Integrity and Major Frauds Unit has charged cryptocurrency fraud cases involving over $2 billion in intended financial losses to investors worldwide.
In its annual report summing up enforcement actions, the CFTC noted that nearly half of all cases in 2023 involved conduct related to digital asset commodities. Meanwhile, the SEC highlighted that 2023 was notable for its enforcement of “crypto-related misconduct, including fraud schemes, unregistered crypto assets and platforms, and illegal celebrity touting.” Since 2014, the SEC has brought more than 200 actions related to crypto asset and cyber enforcement.
The most stringent cases played out in the first half of the year when the SEC accused Binance and Coinbase of engaging in illegal securities dealing in a pair of lawsuits.
Most notably, the SEC alleges that at least 13 crypto assets available to Coinbase customers — including Solana’s sol, Cardano’s ada, and Protocol Labs’ filecoin — should be considered securities, meaning they’d need to be subject to strict transparency and disclosure requirements.
In Binance’s case, the SEC went a step further. In addition to securities law violations, the company and its co-founder and CEO Changpeng Zhao were also accused of commingling customer assets with company funds.
Concerning criminal enforcement, Damian Williams, the U.S. attorney for the Southern District of New York, has been leading some of Justice’s highest-profile crypto prosecutions, including the monthlong trial of Bankman-Fried, the disgraced FTX founder. In November, a jury found the former FTX chief executive guilty of all seven criminal counts against him following a few hours of deliberation.
But crypto companies have begun to push back, with some threatening to decamp from the U.S. entirely should this dynamic of policing by enforcement continue.
Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong condemned the SEC’s actions against the exchange and suggested the company may be forced to move its headquarters overseas. Armstrong later walked back the threat of relocating abroad, but Coinbase and other major crypto firms have still begun to invest more heavily in their international operations.
Crypto market participants nevertheless hope that the spate of legal challenges brought to crypto companies in 2023 will bring clarity in the form of new regulations.
“Clearer regulatory frameworks and stance from regulators globally have provided a sense of legitimacy and security, encouraging more widespread participation in the bitcoin market,” Alyse Killeen, managing partner of Stillmark Capital, told CNBC.
The crypto industry saw the most legislative progress on crypto laws in the U.S. this year, with one of the competing digital asset bills making it past multiple House committees for the first time.
Even as U.S. lawmakers take steps toward crypto legislation, there remains no law in the U.S. tailored specifically for the industry. Nelson Mullins Riley & Scarborough’s Levin tells CNBC it’s unlikely that we’ll see much progress in a presidential election year and with a divided federal government.
He argues that even without rules on crypto from lawmakers, routine complaints that U.S. regulators are not providing guidance to the industry are without merit.
According to Levin, “The SEC, the CFTC and FinCEN routinely provide informal guidance on the regulation of digital assets and cryptocurrencies.”
“The SEC even went so far as to provide a framework for the analysis of digital assets and cryptocurrencies. The SEC also created a fake digital asset (Hosey Coin) that gave advice to the FinTech community on how not to launch a digital asset,” Levin added.
“Some members of the industry forget the SEC is relying on laws that were written when American football players wore leather helmets, and the SEC must apply those laws to the FinTech industry,” he said.
Despite crypto’s recent fading buzz, Killeen of Stillmark Capital doesn’t expect regulators to become fatigued by crypto in 2024. In the same time year that two of crypto’s leading figures were sent to jail, shares of Coinbase — and prices of digital currencies like bitcoin and ether — have rallied sharply.
Since the start of this year, Coinbase’s stock price has surged more than 400%. Bitcoin and ether, meanwhile, have both roughly doubled in price. That’s as investors anticipate that approval for a bitcoin exchange-traded fund by the SEC may be around the corner.
Europe
The European Union looks set to apply its Markets in Crypto-Assets legislation, which is aimed at taming the “Wild West” of the crypto industry, in full force starting next year.
The law, initially proposed in 2019 as a response to Meta’s digital currency project Diem, formerly known as Libra, aimed to clean up fraud, money laundering and other illicit financing in the crypto space, and stamp out the sector’s bad actors more broadly.
Read more about tech and crypto from CNBC Pro
It also sought to tackle a perceived threat from so-called stablecoins, or blockchain-based tokens that serve as a representation of government money but are backed by private companies. Stablecoins are effectively digital currencies that are pegged to the value of fiat currencies like the dollar.
While tether and Circle’s USDC aren’t perceived as “systemic” assets capable of disrupting financial stability, a private stablecoin from a massive company like Meta, Visa or Mastercard could pose a bigger threat and potentially undermine sovereign currencies, in several EU central bankers’ eyes.
The U.S.’s dominant role in global finance and its focus on consumer protection plays a crucial role in its leading position in crypto regulation enforcement. However, the landscape is evolving, and other jurisdictions are steadily enhancing their regulatory and enforcement frameworks in crypto.
Braden Perry
Former federal enforcement attorney and current partner at
Part of the EU’s framework for crypto is aimed at tackling threats — particularly that of the euro being undermined — by making it impossible for issuers to mint stablecoins backed by currencies other than the euro, like the U.S. dollar, once they meet the threshold of more than 1 million transactions per day.
Meanwhile, the European Union is moving towards a unified regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies with its Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA).
This year, the three main political institutions of the EU-approved MiCA, paving the way for the regulation to become law. MiCA came into force in June 2023, but it’s not expected to apply fully until December 2024.
Companies are already getting ready to take advantage of the new rules, with Coinbase submitting an application for a universal MiCA license in Ireland. If and when it is approved, this would allow Coinbase to “passport” its services into other countries like Germany, France, Italy, and the Netherlands.
Braden Perry, former federal enforcement attorney and current partner at law firm Kennyhertz Perry, said that while the U.S. remains a top enforcer for the crypto industry, its perception as a regulator “may be diminishing,” as other jurisdictions have stepped in with clearer rules.
“This perception stems from the proactive measures taken by U.S. regulatory bodies like the SEC, CFTC, and IRS, especially in addressing fraud and security issues in the crypto market. High-profile legal actions in the U.S. further cement its image as a strict enforcer,” he said.
“However, other regions, including Singapore, Dubai, Hong Kong, and the European Union, are also developing robust regulatory frameworks,” Perry added. “While these regions may not be as visible in international media for enforcement actions, they possess significant and sometimes stringent regulatory mechanisms.”
But while the broader EU has been racing to implement new crypto laws, individual European countries haven’t been resting on their laurels.
France has been tempting crypto companies and traders alike to its shores with the promise of tax cuts on crypto profits and a smoother registration process for digital asset firms.
Starting from Jan 1, 2024, France’s Financial Markets Authority, or AMF, is set to amend its registration requirements for crypto firms to better align with MiCA, according to an August statement from the regulator.
At the same time, French authorities have kept a skeptical eye on fraudulent activity among various crypto players. In September, French regulators added 22 fraudulent websites — including some that market trading in crypto and crypto-linked derivatives — to a blacklist of unauthorized foreign exchange providers.
In Germany, meanwhile, the financial regulator Bafin has said it wants to accelerate its approach to licensing crypto custody services, as part of a broader effort to instill trust and transparency in the crypto market.
The U.K., a non-member of the EU, passed a law in June that gives regulators the ability to oversee stablecoins. But there are no concrete rules for crypto just yet.
The U.K.’s Treasury department released its response to a consultation on new crypto rules earlier this year, confirming that it plans to bring a range of crypto activities, including crypto custody and lending, within existing laws governing financial services firms in the country.
Asia
Earlier this year, the Monetary Authority of Singapore, which is recognized for clear fintech and crypto regulations that do not rely heavily on enforcement actions, finalized rules for stablecoins, making it one of the world’s first jurisdictions to do so.
Singapore was notably bruised by the collapse of TerraUSD, a controversial algorithmic stablecoin, in 2022, as well as the fall of Three Arrows Capital, or 3AC. Both Terra Labs, the company behind Terra, and 3AC were headquartered in Singapore.
Singapore’s new framework requires stablecoin issuers to back them with low-risk and highly-liquid assets, which must equal or exceed the value of tokens in circulation at all times, return the par value of the digital currency to holders within five business days of a redemption request, and disclose audit results of reserves to users.
The region has been increasingly warming to crypto assets, despite a broader anti-crypto push from China, which banned bitcoin trading and mining in 2021.
The Hong Kong Securities and Futures Commission, or SFC, launched a registration regime for digital asset businesses earlier this year, with clear regulations for crypto exchanges and funds.
So far, only two firms, OSL Digital and Hash Blockchain, have been handed licenses.
The Middle East and Africa
The United Arab Emirates has emerged as a popular base for the fintech sector more broadly, given its lack of personal income tax, flexible visa policies, and competitive incentives for international businesses and workers.
In 2022, in a bid to lead the virtual assets sector in the Middle East and Africa, Dubai — the UAE’s most populous city — launched VARA, or the Virtual Asset Regulatory Authority.
“Dubai and the UAE have created favorable conditions for cryptocurrency businesses, offering specific zones and guidelines for crypto trading,” said Perry.
Blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis notes that regulators in the UAE were early to cryptocurrency, with Dubai leading the charge when it launched a blockchain strategy in 2016.
“Since then, UAE regulators have remained at the forefront of the industry,” according to a Chainalysis report.
Two years later, in 2018, Abu Dhabi Global Market created the world’s first regulatory framework for cryptocurrency to foster innovation while safeguarding consumers.
Earlier this year, the UAE passed further crypto regulations at the federal level to make it easier for regulators like VARA to police the sector and run economic-free zones.
President Donald Trump‘s attack on solar and wind projects threatens to raise energy prices for consumers and undermine a stretched electric grid that’s already straining to meet rapidly growing demand, renewable energy executives warn.
Trump has long said wind power turbines are unattractive and endanger birds, and that solar installations take up too much land. This week, he said his administration will not approve solar and wind projects, the latest salvo in a campaign the president has waged against the renewable energy industry since taking office.
“We will not approve wind or farmer destroying Solar,” Trump posted on Truth Social Wednesday. “The days of stupidity are over in the USA!!!”
Trump’s statement this week seemed to confirm industry fears that the Interior Department will block federal permits for solar and wind projects. Interior Secretary Doug Burgum took control of all permit approvals last month in a move that the American Clean Power Association criticized as “obstruction,” calling it “unprecedented political review.”
The Interior Department blocking permits would slow the growth of the entire solar and wind industry, top executives at renewable developers Arevon, Avantus and Engie North America told CNBC.
Even solar and wind projects on private land may need approvals from the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service if, for example, a waterway or animal species is affected, the executives told CNBC. The three power companies are among the top 10 renewable developers in the U.S., according to energy research firm Enverus.
The Interior Department “will not give preferential treatment to massive, unreliable projects that make no sense for the American people or that risk harming communities or the environment,” a spokesperson told CNBC when asked if new permits would be issued for solar and wind construction.
Choking off renewables will worsen a looming power supply shortage, harm the electric grid and lead to higher electricity prices for consumers, said Kevin Smith, CEO of Arevon, a solar and battery storage developer headquartered in Scottsdale, Arizona, that’s active in 17 states. Arevon operates five gigawatts of power equivalent to $10 billion of capital investment.
“I don’t think everybody realizes how big the crunch is going to be,” Smith said. “We’re making that crunch more and more difficult with these policy changes.”
Uncertainty hits investment
The red tape at the Interior Department and rising costs from Trump’s copper and steel tariffs have created market instability that makes planning difficult, the renewable executives said.
“We don’t want to sign contracts until we know what the playing field is,” said Cliff Graham, CEO of Avantus, a solar and battery storage developer headquartered in San Diego. Avantus has built three gigawatts of solar and storage across the desert Southwest.
“I can do whatever you want me to do and have a viable business, I just need the rules set and in place,” Graham said.
Engie North America, the U.S. arm of a global energy company based in Paris, is slashing its planned investment in the U.S. by 50% due to tariffs and regulatory uncertainty, said David Carroll, the chief renewables officer who leads the American subsidiary. Engie could cut its plans even more, he said.
Engie’s North American subsidiary, headquartered in Houston, will operate about 11 gigawatts of solar, battery storage and wind power by year end.
Multinationals like Engie have long viewed the U.S. as one of the most stable business environments in the world, Carroll said. But that assessment is changing in Engie’s boardroom and across the industry, he said.
“The stability of the U.S. business market is no longer really the gold standard,” Carroll said.
Rising costs
Arevon is seeing costs for solar and battery storage projects increase by as much as 30% due to the metal tariffs, said Smith, the CEO. Many renewable developers are renegotiating power prices with utilities to cover the sudden spike in costs because projects no longer pencil out financially, he said.
Trump’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act ends two key tax credits for solar and wind projects in late 2027, making conditions even more challenging. The investment tax credit supported new renewable construction and the production credit boosted clean electricity generation.
Those tax credits were just passed on to consumers, Smith said. Their termination and the rising costs from tariffs will mean higher utility bills for families and businesses, he said.
The price that Avantus charges for solar power has roughly doubled to $60 per megawatt-hour as interest rates and tariffs have increased over the years, said CEO Graham. Prices will surge again to around $100 per megawatt-hour when the tax credits are gone, he said.
“The small manufacturers, small companies and mom and pops will see their electric bills go up, and it’ll start pushing the small entrepreneurs out of the industry or out of the marketplace,” Graham said.
Renewable projects that start construction by next July, a year after the One Big Beautiful Act became law, will still qualify for the tax credits. Arevon, Avantus and Engie are moving forward with projects currently under construction, but the outlook is less certain for projects later in the decade.
The U.S. will see a big downturn in new renewable power generation starting in the second half of 2026 through 2028 as new projects no longer qualify for tax credits, said Smith, the head of Arevon.
“The small- and medium-sized players that can’t take the financial risk, some of them will disappear,” Smith said. “You’re going to see less projects built in the sector.”
Artificial intelligence power crunch
Fewer renewable power plants could increase the risk of brownouts or blackouts, Smith said. Electricity demand is surging from the data centers that technology companies are building to train artificial intelligence systems. PJM Interconnection, the largest electrical grid in the U.S. that coordinates wholesale electricity in 13 states and the District of Columbia, has warned of tight power supplies because too little new generation is coming online.
Renewables are the power source that can most quickly meet demand, Smith at Arevon said. More than 90% of the power waiting to connect to the grid is solar, battery storage or wind, according to data from Enverus.
“The power requirement is largely going to be coming from the new energy sector or not at all,” so without it, “the grid becomes substantially hampered,” Smith said.
Trump is prioritizing oil, gas and nuclear power as “the most effective and reliable tools to power our country,” White House spokesperson Anna Kelly said.
“President Trump serves the American people who voted to implement his America First energy agenda – not solar and wind executives who are sad that Biden’s Green New Scam subsidies are ending,” Kelly said.
But new natural gas plants won’t come online for another five years due to supply issues, new nuclear power is a decade away and no new coal plants are on the drawing board.
Utilities may have to turn away data centers at some point because there isn’t enough surplus power to run them, and no one wants to risk blackouts at hospitals, schools and homes, Arevon’s Smith said. This would pressure the U.S. in its race against China to master AI, a Trump administration priority.
“The panic in the data center, AI world is probably not going to set in for another 12 months or so, when they start realizing that they can’t get the power they need in some of these areas where they’re planning to build data centers,” Smith said.
“Then we’ll see what happens,” said the University of Chicago MBA, who’s worked in the energy industry for 35 years. “There may be a reversal in policy to try and build whatever we can and get power onto the grid.”
Over the weekend, Tesla began offering many Cybertruck trade-in estimated values above the original purchase price, apparently due to a glitch in its system.
Tesla offers online trade-in estimates for individuals considering purchasing a vehicle from them.
Over the last few days, Cybertruck owners who submitted their vehicles through the system were surprised to see Tesla offering extremely high valuations on the vehicle, often above what they originally paid for the electric truck.
Here are a few examples:
Advertisement – scroll for more content
$79,200 for a 2025 Cybertruck AWD with 18,000 miles. Since this is a 2025 model year, it was eligible for the tax credit and Tesla is offering the same price as new without incentive.
Here Tesla offered $118,800 for a 2024 Cybertruck ‘Cyberbeast’ tri-motor with 21,000 miles.
In this example, Tesla offers $11,000 more than the owner originally paid for a 2024 Cybertruck.
So, trade in the Foundation Series Cybertruck AWD for $11k more than I paid for it originally, re-buy an AWD with FSD for $79,490 after the tax credit.
I’d lose free supercharging for life, Cyberwheels, and white interior.
The trade-in estimates made no sense. Tesla has been known to offer more attractive estimates online and then come lower with the official final offer, but this is on a whole different level.
Some speculated that Tesla’s trade-in estimate system was malfunctioning, while others thought Tesla was indirectly recalling early Cybertrucks.
It appears to be the former.
Some Tesla Cybertruck owners who tried to go through a new order with their Cybertruck as a trade-in were told by Tesla advisors that the system was “glitching” and they would not be honoring those prices.
Tesla told buyers that it would be refunding its usually “non-refundable” order fee.
Electrek’s Take
That’s a weird glitch. I assume that it was trying to change how the trade-in value would be estimated and the new math didn’t work for the Cybertruck for whatever reason.
It’s the only thing that makes sense to me.
The Cybertruck’s value is already quite weird due to the fact that Tesla still has new vehicles made in 2024, which are not eligible for the tax credit incentive, while the new ones made in 2025 are eligible.
There’s also the Foundation Series, which bundles many features for a $20,000 higher price.
All these things affect the value and can make it hard to compare with new Cybertrucks offered with 0% interest.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.
Like a 90s “gifted” kid that was supposed to be a lot of things, the electric Jeep Wagoneer S never really found its place — but when dealers started discounting the Jeep brands forward-looking flagship by nearly $25,000 back in June, I wrote that it might be time to give the go-fast Wagoneer S a second look.
Whether we’re talking about Mercedes-Benz, Cerberus, Fiat, or even Enzo Ferrari, outsiders have labeled Jeep as a potentially premium brand that could, “if managed properly,” command luxury-level prices all over the globe. That hasn’t happened, and Stellantis is just the latest in a long line of companies to sink massive capital into the brand only to realize that people will not, in fact, spend Mercedes money on a Jeep.
Advertisement – scroll for more content
That said, the Jeep Wagoneer S is not a bad car (and neither is its totally different, hideously massive, ICE-powered Wagoneer sibling, frankly). Built on the same Stellantis STLA Large vehicle platform that underpins the sporty Charger Daytona EVs, the confusingly-named Wagoneer S packs dual electric motors putting out almost 600 hp. That’s good enough to scoot the ‘ute 0 to 60 mph in a stomach-turning 3.5 seconds and enough, on paper, to convince Stellantis executives that they had developed a real, market-ready alternative to the Tesla Model Y.
With the wrong name and a sky-high starting price of $66,995 (not including the $1,795 destination fee), however, that demand didn’t materialize, leaving the Wagoneer S languishing on dealer lots across the country.
That could be about to change, however, thanks to big discounts on Wagoneer S being reported at CDJR dealers in several states:
Jeff Belzer’s in Minnesota has a 2025 Wagoneer S Limited with a $67,790 MSRP for $39,758 ($28,032 off)
Troncalli CDJR in Georgia has a 2025 Wagoneer S Limited with a $67,590 MSRP for $42,697 ($24,893 off)
Whitewater CDJR in Minnesota has a 2025 Wagoneer S Limited with a $67,790 MSRP for $43,846 ($23,944 off)
Antioch CDJR in Illinois has a 2025 Wagoneer S Limited with a $67,790 MSRP for $44,540 ($23,250 off)
“Stellantis bet big on electric versions of iconic American brands like Jeep and Dodge, but consumers aren’t buying the premise,” writes CDG’s Marcus Amick. “(Stellantis’ dealer body) is now stuck with expensive EVs that need huge discounts to move, eating into already thin margins while competitors focus on [more] profitable gas-powered vehicles.”
All of which is to say: if you’ve found yourself drawn to the Jeep Wagoneer S, but couldn’t quite stomach the $70,000+ window stickers, you might want to check in with your local Jeep dealer and see how you feel about it at a JCPenneys-like 30% off!
Jeep Wagoneer S gallery
Original content from Electrek; images via Stellantis.
Your personalized solar quotes are easy to compare online and you’ll get access to unbiased Energy Advisors to help you every step of the way. The best part? No one will call you until after you’ve elected to move forward. Get started, hassle-free, by clicking here.
FTC: We use income earning auto affiliate links.More.