Site iconSite icon ForkLog

Comment: The BitMEX crackdown bodes ill for the DeFi sector

Comment: The BitMEX crackdown bodes ill for the DeFi sector

The indictment by U.S. authorities against the crypto derivatives exchange BitMEX could be a gloomy omen for the decentralized finance sector. The reason is the reference to violations of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), according to Adam Cochran, partner at Cinneamhain Ventures.

The expert notes that in criminal cases authorities often move from the letter of the law to its spirit, focusing more on achieving its objectives than on the precise wording.

He points to the joint actions of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) and the Department of Justice against BitMEX.

The CFTC can impose regulatory and civil penalties. In the DOJ’s remit lie criminal offenses.

The CFTC’s suit against BitMEX, in which the latter is accused of operating an unregistered trading platform, invites parallels with the DeFi sector—how far the regulator’s guiding principles apply to DeFi protocols.

“Perhaps the crypto community is right that the CFTC’s requirements do not apply to DeFi. It is a gray area. The Commission’s charges will lead to fines. A more serious threat is the BSA. Its job is to prevent money laundering,” the expert writes.

Cochran doubts that the decentralized nature of DeFi services absolves participants from accountability. He adds that the myth has been aided by a narrow view of regulatory limits on exchanges.

As support for his view, he cites prosecutions of traders on LocalBitcoins and Paxful for alleged money laundering.

“The litmus test here is whether the person merely sold a small amount of cryptocurrency in small batches once, or engaged in systematic commercial activity. To convict the latter, not much is required,” Cochran emphasizes.

Under the BSA, the crucial point is the act of financial facilitation. Whoever you are — a person, an issuer, an exchange, a legal entity, a depository, a trustee or agent, or a combination of these — the expert explains.

“The only thing that matters is whether you helped facilitate the exchange of monetary instruments for criminals in the United States without complying with the US KYC/AML standards,” the expert notes.

Cochran argues that claims regulators cannot stop a smart contract are not credible. He notes leverage through the BSA on developers, frontend builders and firms hiring staff to work on the protocol.

The partner at Cinneamhain Ventures believes users are likely to refrain from interacting with the protocol, which could lead to its shutdown.

“The point is that a protocol is not outside the reach of authorities; there are always pressure points. While DeFi may sit in a grey area under some rules, it is clear that the BSA applies to them,” he sums up.

The expert contends that DeFi currently has no workable middle ground. There is no technology that would allow BSA compliance; and that, in his view, does not guarantee regulators won’t demand it.

“The point is that a protocol isn’t outside the reach of the government; there are always pressure points that can be applied. While DeFi may be in a grey area with some regulation, it is clear that the BSA applies to it,” the expert concludes.

One user suggested that Bitcoin users could face the same enforcement risk. In the end, anyone could face this risk regarding unknown coins.

In September, SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce stated that regulators should take a less liberal approach to regulating the DeFi sector.

In the BitMEX trader list, US residents were found.

Subscribe to ForkLog news on Telegram: ForkLog FEED — the full news feed, ForkLog — the most important news and polls.

Exit mobile version