Today, DEF, @a16z, @DigitalChamber, @orca_so, @theblockprof, & @UniswapFND wrote to @SECGov in response to @citsecurities' letter misrepresenting how DeFi technology works.
Why this group? Citadel blatantly miscited us, and we feel obligated to correct the record.
2/ Context: on Dec 2, Citadel Securities sent a letter to the SEC re: “Tokenized U.S. Equity Securities & DeFi Trading Protocols.”
As we explain, Citadel “baselessly encourages the SEC to regulate decentralized finance (‘DeFi’) technologies, developers, and others, as traditional SEC-registered intermediaries.” Citadel alleges that everything from validators to self-custody wallet providers to “smart contract developers” are “intermediaries” like securities brokers.
3/ As organizations deeply committed to technological progress, consumer protection, and market integrity, we want to set the record straight, correcting Citadel’s mischaracterizations of our own submissions and misleading arguments about DeFi.
As we write: “Citadel’s letter rests on a flawed analysis of the securities laws that attempts to extend SEC registration requirements to essentially any entity with even the most tangential connection to a DeFi transaction.”
4/ Importantly, we cite-check Citadel. We highlight their faulty citations and mischaracterizations of the source material in an easy-to-read chart, sorted by “most to least egregious claims.”
5/ We are thankful to our cosignatories for joining us and standing up for DeFi.
1/ Last night, we filed our response to the CFTC’s filing from last week in the Ooki DAO matter, specifically concerning their motion for alternative service.
2/ We argue that the CFTC “cannot have it both ways” and that to “lawfully effect service consistent with its Complaint’s theory, the Commission must demonstrate both (i) that its method of service is reasonably calculated to reach those specific voting token holders and…
3/ …(ii) that Ooki DAO is actually an unincorporated association that can accept service.”
2/ Understandably, govts have a keen interest in stopping illicit financial activity. No one wants criminals to get away with their loot.
But a common misconception of the DeFi ecosystem is that it is somehow out of compliance w/ the US’s AML/CFT framework. This is not true.
3/ The truth is that DeFi protocols can and do comply with existing U.S. laws and regulations designed to combat illicit financial activity — including U.S. sanctions requirements.
3/ This bill would prohibit fed agencies from restricting “the ability of a covered user to— (1) use virtual currency or its equivalent for such user’s own purposes, such as to purchase real or virtual goods and services for the user’s own use…
As much as the industry is driven by devs, investors & founders, the question of how “normal” ppl will or won’t use these systems & protocols is vital.
@future_majority's DEF-funded poll turned up some interesting answers...
2/ First, the good news. 93% of the 1,054 ppl surveyed have heard of cryptocurrency. That’s high.
Even DeFi is relatively well known, with 48% of respondents noting they’ve heard the term. DeFi is young and can be hard to understand; in that context, this is also a high number.
3/ Survey respondents were very clear on the basic right of Americans to be able to access financial services *outside* of traditional banks AND be free of government surveillance.
This is DeFi, even if most people don’t know it yet.