Connect with us

Published

on

J.W. Verret is a Harvard-educated attorney who teaches corporate finance and accounting at George Mason University. His work has increasingly intersected with the cryptocurrency sector in recent years, as his legion of Twitter followers — who know him as “BlockProf,” or the Blockchain Professor — are poignantly aware.

Aside from his work at GMU, Verret has become known as a vocal advocate for crypto as the top honcho at Crypto Freedom Lab, a think tank fighting devoted to preserving “freedom and privacy for crypto developers and users.” He also serves as a professional legal witness for defendants accused — wrongfully, Verret would argue — of evading financial-tracking laws, and is authoring a book, tentatively titled “Blockchain Privacy and Forensics.” In between, he finds time to serve as a regular columnist for Cointelegraph.

1) You’re very busy professionally — teaching at George Mason University, serving on committees with the Securities and Exchange Commission, going to trials as expert witness. How did life lead you to cryptocurrency?

I spent 15 years as a libertarian regulation/financial person, writing it, think-tanking it in Washington, D.C. For the first 10 years, I lost everything I fought for in the Dodd-Frank era.



The thing with crypto is that it’s been a freedom revolution in finance. It fixes, or aims to fix, problems in finance that government regulation only aims to fix. Regulation entrenches intermediaries where crypto fixes problems by eliminating the need for those intermediaries. And that was very interesting to me. 

2) You served on the SEC’s Investor Advisory Committee, but you’ve also been very vocal in criticizing SEC Chairman Gary Gensler. How was that experience?

It was good. I replaced Hester Peirce when she became an SEC commissioner. I wrote a lot of dissents as a committee member, so I hope I did Hester proud, but I do not think they’ll invite me back in the future under the current chairman. It seems like he’s been trying to just destroy this industry.

He could’ve reached out to the industry to try to make things work, but he has no interest in that, and he’s sued some of the best actors in crypto — Coinbase and Kraken — while ignoring the worst.

3) You’re a vocal proponent of ZCash. Explain your interest there.

Zcash is like Bitcoin, but private. It’a a great invention. Whoever the developers were  deserve a Nobel Prize.

I own a lot of Bitcoin. I think it’s a tremendous innovation. But for day-to-day payments, I think we need some privacy, and it’s hard to get that with Bitcoin. I’m also a fan of Monero. which has some pretty good privacy technology. But they’re both pretty good projects — t’s possible to like both the Rolling Stones and the Beatles.

Also read: The Supreme Court could stop the SEC’s war on crypto

There are no other privacy tokens that are in the same ballpark. There are some that are really neat innovations, but they’re not at the level you need to have the same privacy. Other projects I’m very excited about are Samourai Wallet and Sparrow Wallet, which offer a bit of privacy for BItcoin transactions.

4) On that note, how do you think the future of crypto is going to be defined? Is it going to be defined as a way to achieve greater privacy in transaction? Will it be defined by efficiency in the sense that it’s easier to use than traditional finance instruments? Will it be defined by crime? Or will it be some mixture of these?

That’s an interesting question. I think it will be some combination of all those things. Crime is often a testing ground for new technology. It certainly was for the internet. In the 1990s, a lot of criminals used the internet. I think the strongest forces in determining what cryptos survive will be some mixture of efficiency and scale, but I think privacy will be a part of it. As governments and big corporations fight back against trustless, disintermediated property transfers, the only way to protect yourself will be through the use of privacy coins and privacy protocols.

5) You’re also serving as a professional witness in U.S. v. Sterlingov, where the U.S. government is charging 33-year-old Roman Sterlingov with developing Bitcoin Fog — a crypto mixer. The FBI arrested him at Los Angeles International Airport (LAX) in 2021, and they’re accusing him [Bitcoin Fog] of laundering $336 million. Tell me about that.

I spend a lot of time as a forensic accountant, but I’m also into privacy. Some people think that’s a conflict: How can you be privacy while also following the money? But I don’t see that as a conflict at all. Some of the people most into privacy who I know are forensic investigators. I’m a believer in public information. People should learn what it takes to be private. The worst people tend not to be smart anyway — they make mistakes, and they don’t use privacy tools optimally.

Also read: CipherTrace expert says Chainalysis data contributed to ‘wrongful arrest’ of alleged Bitcoin Fog founder

In terms of U.S. v. Sterlingov, I’m providing some expert help in forensic accounting and money laundering. It’s been helpful to merge my legal and accounting perspectives to aid the legal team.  I also do some work helping customers of large crypto exchanges when their crypto is frozen, and we ultimately resolve it when we figure out that the customer did nothing wrong — but were falsely flagged by crypto tracing tools.

Read also


Features

‘Account abstraction’ supercharges Ethereum wallets: Dummies guide 


Features

As Money Printer Goes Brrrrr, Wall St Loses Its Fear of Bitcoin

False positives in crypto tracing can have a real cost and that is one thing that concerns me about the dominance of some of the tracing firms. TRM and Ciphertrace seem like they try to get things right — and don’t overclaim their tracing capabilities — but that’s not true of every firm in this industry.

6) I hear you have opinions about UFOs. Can you tell us what you know?

I’m really into podcasts about the history of investigations into UFOs. Some good ones are “Strange Arrivals” and “High Strange.” I’d also recommend reading J. Allen Hynek’s “The Hynek UFO Report,” which is about the Project BLUE BOOK Report. He was a physics professor at a little school [Ohio State] and the Air Force asked him to look into it one day. I think they thought he’d be a front man — and he was, but then he changed.

The government knows no more now than it did 50 years ago. They may know more than they’ve shared, but I don’t think they understand it. The Navy pilot revelations are pretty amazing. So I think they do exist. I think they’re probably probes of some kind that are unmanned — nothing armageddon or conspiracy. I just think they want to see what we’re up to.

Rudy Takala

Rudy Takala

Rudy Takala is the opinion editor at Cointelegraph. He formerly worked as an editor or reporter in newsrooms that include Fox News, The Hill and the Washington Examiner. He holds a master’s degree in political communication from American University in Washington, DC.

Continue Reading

Politics

EU eyes euro stablecoins to challenge dollar monopoly

Published

on

By

EU eyes euro stablecoins to challenge dollar monopoly

EU eyes euro stablecoins to challenge dollar monopoly

The change in rhetoric followed a US dollar-pegged stablecoin boom in 2025 due to the passage of key legislation in the United States.

Continue Reading

Politics

Bybit secures regulatory approval in UAE

Published

on

By

Bybit secures regulatory approval in UAE

Bybit secures regulatory approval in UAE

The license came eight months after the regulator granted the company in-principle approval, and a few weeks after Bybit secured a non-operational license for Dubai.

Continue Reading

Politics

Starmer denies ministers involved in China spy trial collapse

Published

on

By

Starmer denies ministers involved in China spy trial collapse

Sir Keir Starmer has denied any ministers were involved in the collapse of the trial of alleged Chinese spies.

Christopher Cash, 30, a former parliamentary researcher, and teacher Christopher Berry, 33, were accused of spying for China, but weeks before their trial was due to begin, it was dropped.

Berry, of Witney, Oxfordshire, and Cash, of Whitechapel, east London denied the allegations.

Politics Latest: Starmer “less interested” in Blair than ceasefire

Sir Keir, his ministers and national security adviser Jonathan Powell have faced accusations they were involved in the trial being dropped.

The prime minister has maintained that because the last Conservative government had not designated China as a threat to national security, his government could not provide evidence to that effect, which the director of public prosecutions Stephen Parkinson said was required to meet the threshold for prosecution.

Mr Parkinson had blamed ministers for failing to provide the crucial evidence needed to proceed.

More on China

During a trade visit to India, the prime minister was asked whether any minister, or Mr Powell, were involved in the decision not to provide the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) with evidence that, at the time of the alleged offences, China represented a threat to national security.

He replied: “I can be absolutely clear no ministers were involved in any of the decisions since this government’s been in in relation to the evidence that’s put before the court on this issue.”

He did not mention Mr Powell specifically.

Read more:
Blame game over trial collapse. Who’s right? Who’s wrong?

Christopher Cash (left) and Christopher Berry had the charges against them dropped in September. Pics: Reuters
Image:
Christopher Cash (left) and Christopher Berry had the charges against them dropped in September. Pics: Reuters

Earlier this week, Mr Parkinson took the unusual step of sending MPs a letter to say the government had refused to label Beijing an enemy, which led to the case being dropped.

Sir Keir reiterated his line that the case could only rely on evidence from the period the pair were accused of spying, from 2021 to 2023, when the Conservatives were in government.

He said: “The evidence in this case was drawn up at the time and reflected the position as it was at the time,” the PM said in India.

“And that has remained the situation from start to finish.

“That is inevitably the case because in the United Kingdom, you can only try people on the basis of the situation as it was at the time.

“You can’t try people on the basis of the situation, as it now is or might be in the future, and therefore, the only evidence that a court would ever admit on this would be evidence of what the situation was at the time.

“It’s not a party political point. It’s a matter of law.”

Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player

Is China an enemy to the UK?

Sir Keir’s assertion has been called into question by former top civil servants and legal experts.

Mark Elliott, professor of public law at the University of Cambridge, told Sky News there is no legal requirement for a country to be declared an enemy for someone to be tried for breaching the Official Secrets Act.

He said the current government was “cherry picking” what the previous government had said about China to claim they did not regard them as a threat to national security.

However, there are several examples of the Tory government saying China was a national security threat during the time Berry and Cash were accused of spying.

Continue Reading

Trending