Connect with us

Published

on

NY attorney general urges Congress to keep pensions crypto-free — ‘No intrinsic value’

New York Attorney General Letitia James has sent a letter to US congressional leaders urging “common sense” federal crypto regulations and to keep digital assets out of US pensions.

“I am urging Congress to pass legislation that would strengthen federal regulations on the cryptocurrency industry to protect investors, strengthen financial markets, and stop fraud,” James said in a 14-page letter shared on April 10, outlining six major risks if the sector remains unregulated.

She said that without appropriate safeguards, the “unchecked proliferation of digital assets” undermines US dollar dominance, weakens national security due to criminal activity, and “undermines the stability of financial markets.” 

Unregulated crypto also subjects investors to “price manipulation and rigged markets,” facilitates fraud that “drains billions of dollars from hardworking Americans, and extracts assets and investments from the American economy,” she said. 

NY attorney general urges Congress to keep pensions crypto-free — ‘No intrinsic value’

An excerpt of James’ letter to Congress. Source: Office of the New York State Attorney General

James made a number of recommendations and pushed Congress for legislation that would require stablecoin issuers to have a US presence and regulatory oversight and mandate backing stablecoins with US dollars or treasuries. 

She also wants regulations that require platforms to work only with anti-money laundering-compliant entities, establish registration requirements for issuers and intermediaries, protect against conflicts of interest and promote price transparency and require fraud prevention measures.

No crypto assets in pension funds 

The New York’s top lawyer also aired her concerns about including crypto in pension funds. 

“Digital assets are uniquely unsuitable for retirement savings due to their high volatility,” she said, claiming that they have no value.

“The underlying value of cryptocurrency is unpredictable and not determined by true price discovery because they have no intrinsic value on which their prices are based.”

James also urged against retirement funds investing in crypto-tracking exchange-traded funds, stating that “unlike traditional exchange-traded funds backed by stocks and bonds, cryptocurrency held to back cryptocurrency ETFs are at risk of permanent theft.” 

Related: US lawmaker will reintroduce crypto retirement bill to help Trump agenda

“As Congress takes the mantle to propose legislation governing the cryptocurrency industry, we hope it also takes action to mitigate the risks posed by the industry to America’s national security, financial stability, and citizens,” James said. 

The call for regulation follows the US Department of Justice’s reported dismantling of its federal criminal cryptocurrency fraud enforcement division.

Magazine: 3 reasons Ethereum could turn a corner: Kain Warwick, X Hall of Flame

Continue Reading

Politics

Crypto’s path to legitimacy runs through the CARF regulation

Published

on

By

Crypto’s path to legitimacy runs through the CARF regulation

Crypto’s path to legitimacy runs through the CARF regulation

The CARF regulation, which brings crypto under global tax reporting standards akin to traditional finance, marks a crucial turning point.

Continue Reading

Politics

Tokenized equity still in regulatory grey zone — Attorneys

Published

on

By

Tokenized equity still in regulatory grey zone — Attorneys

Tokenized equity still in regulatory grey zone — Attorneys

The nascent real-world tokenized assets track prices but do not provide investors the same legal rights as holding the underlying instruments.

Continue Reading

Politics

Rachel Reeves hints at tax rises in autumn budget after welfare bill U-turn

Published

on

By

Rachel Reeves hints at tax rises in autumn budget after welfare bill U-turn

Rachel Reeves has hinted that taxes are likely to be raised this autumn after a major U-turn on the government’s controversial welfare bill.

Sir Keir Starmer’s Universal Credit and Personal Independent Payment Bill passed through the House of Commons on Tuesday after multiple concessions and threats of a major rebellion.

MPs ended up voting for only one part of the plan: a cut to universal credit (UC) sickness benefits for new claimants from £97 a week to £50 from 2026/7.

Initially aimed at saving £5.5bn, it now leaves the government with an estimated £5.5bn black hole – close to breaching Ms Reeves’s fiscal rules set out last year.

Read more:
Yet another fiscal ‘black hole’? Here’s why this one matters

Success or failure: One year of Keir in nine charts

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Rachel Reeves’s fiscal dilemma

In an interview with The Guardian, the chancellor did not rule out tax rises later in the year, saying there were “costs” to watering down the welfare bill.

“I’m not going to [rule out tax rises], because it would be irresponsible for a chancellor to do that,” Ms Reeves told the outlet.

More on Rachel Reeves

“We took the decisions last year to draw a line under unfunded commitments and economic mismanagement.

“So we’ll never have to do something like that again. But there are costs to what happened.”

Meanwhile, The Times reported that, ahead of the Commons vote on the welfare bill, Ms Reeves told cabinet ministers the decision to offer concessions would mean taxes would have to be raised.

The outlet reported that the chancellor said the tax rises would be smaller than those announced in the 2024 budget, but that she is expected to have to raise tens of billions more.

It comes after Ms Reeves said she was “totally” up to continuing as chancellor after appearing tearful at Prime Minister’s Questions.

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Why was the chancellor crying at PMQs?

Criticising Sir Keir for the U-turns on benefit reform during PMQs, Conservative leader Kemi Badenoch said the chancellor looked “absolutely miserable”, and questioned whether she would remain in post until the next election.

Sir Keir did not explicitly say that she would, and Ms Badenoch interjected to say: “How awful for the chancellor that he couldn’t confirm that she would stay in place.”

In her first comments after the incident, Ms Reeves said she was having a “tough day” before adding: “People saw I was upset, but that was yesterday.

“Today’s a new day and I’m just cracking on with the job.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Reeves is ‘totally’ up for the job

Sir Keir also told Sky News’ political editor Beth Rigby on Thursday that he “didn’t appreciate” that Ms Reeves was crying in the Commons.

“In PMQs, it is bang, bang, bang,” he said. “That’s what it was yesterday.

“And therefore, I was probably the last to appreciate anything else going on in the chamber, and that’s just a straightforward human explanation, common sense explanation.”

Continue Reading

Trending