/regulation & compliance

News and resources on regulation, compliance, legal and governance issues for banks and fintechs.
Kraken’s staking-as-a-service sunk by SEC

Kraken’s staking-as-a-service sunk by SEC

The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) reached a settlement of $30 million with crypto platform Kraken, for the exchange’s failure to register its staking-as-a-service program.

Kraken is no longer able to offer staking-as-a-service in the US, but has announced that the program will still be provided to overseas customers through a subsidiary.

The service would have allowed investors to transfer assets to crypto for staking to receive annual investment returns up to 21%.
SEC commissioner Hester Peirce spoke out against the move in a statement, claiming that the takedown was a heavy a blow on a service that was “serving people well”.

She continued: “Using enforcement actions to tell people what the law is in an emerging industry is not an efficient or fair way of regulating. Moreover, staking services are not uniform, so one-off enforcement actions and cookie-cutter analysis does not cut it.”

Chair of the SEC, Gary Gensler took to Twitter to explain that without providing proper disclosures and verifying the program with a regulatory authority, investors could have been exposed to unfair ownership clauses and been susceptible to heavier losses.

Peirce furthered that instead of banning the service, a process for workable registration should have been provided to investors moving forward.

The SEC similarly received backlash from trading firms Gemini and Genesis after fining them for unregistered securities, leading to the shutdown of Gemini’s crypto lending scheme.

Comments: (2)

A Finextra member
A Finextra member 10 February, 2023, 10:30Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 likes

Ignorance of the law is no defence!

Ketharaman Swaminathan
Ketharaman Swaminathan - GTM360 Marketing Solutions - Pune 13 February, 2023, 10:24Be the first to give this comment the thumbs up 0 likes

It's debatable whether there's any extant law against crypto staking, ergo not clear that someone is even seeking "ignorance of the law" as a defence. 

But, for the sake of argument, assuming there is, let's see what disruptive startups in other regulated industries have done. As I highlighted in Fintechs Need Marketers And Lobbyists, Not Lawyers:

“As startups launch in heavily regulated industries such as food, health, transportation, and housing, clashes with the law have become as common in Silicon Valley as office ping-pong tables. The MOST COMMON APPROACH to these regulatory battles—successfully embraced by lodging site Airbnb, ride-hailing app Uber, fantasy football site FanDuel, and DNA testing and analysis company 23andMe— is to IGNORE THE TROUBLESOME LAW as long as possible. For a long time, the advice was, just keep your head down, build the kind of network you need to be viable, and then once you have viability, NOBODY IS GOING TO BE ABLE TO SHUT YOU DOWN."

Unfo for the crypto industry, it couldn't become "too big to comply" fast enough.

Trending