SEC's Latest Crackdown Could Drive Crypto Firms Out of the U.S.

CoinDeskPublicado em 2023-06-07Última atualização em 2023-06-07

Resumo

Companies such as Coinbase and Binance may not want to, but they could be forced to focus their efforts elsewhere.

Some industry experts say the SEC’s recent actions against U.S.-based Coinbase and Cayman Islands-based Binance could be a net positive for companies operating in the U.S, given the regulatory clarity they could help bring in the long run. In the short to medium term, however, these actions could force these firms to focus their efforts elsewhere.

“Regulatory pressure does create an incentive for exchanges to move overseas; for the digital asset industry specifically, it’s a much easier shift because there are no factories to move,” said Jason Allegrante, Chief Legal and Compliance Officer at infrastructure firm Fireblocks.

Coinbase recently announced it received a license to offer its services in Bermuda, where it reportedly plans to set up a crypto-trading platform outside of the U.S. The exchange is also doubling down on its operations in Canada, which has tightened its regulations for crypto firms but allowed Coinbase to sign an enhanced Pre-Registration Undertaking, signaling its intent to comply with the coming new regulatory framework.

“I suspect we will see more and more moves like this,” Andrew Lawrence, co-founder and CEO of Censo Inc., an on-chain custody solution said. “Yes, the U.S. is the biggest market, but people who are building in the crypto industry are doing so not because of the size of the market now, but because of the size of the market in the future and people are seeing that this future is not looking good in the United States.”

Ben Caselin, Vice President & Chief Strategy Officer at centralized crypto exchange MaskEX, agreed. “All eyes are now set on other jurisdictions,” he said. “This is not the best time for crypto startups in the U.S. Larger players such as Coinbase are able and should engage the regulator to come to solutions, but entrepreneurs and small businesses in crypto are probably better off in other jurisdictions.”

For his part, SEC chief Gary Gensler signaled he’s not too worried about the prospect of crypto firms leaving the U.S. On Tuesday he told Bloomberg TV that “we don’t need more digital currency… we already have digital currency, it’s called the U.S. dollar.”

Fireblocks’ Allegrante said even though the U.S. might be the most profitable market for some exchanges, that may not be reason enough for them to focus all their efforts there. “When a company publicly announces plans to establish exchange operations outside of the United States, you can assume that there are plans in place to shift that balance over time,” Allegrante said about Coinbase.

“I suspect we will see more and more moves like this,” Andrew Lawrence, co-founder and CEO of Censo Inc., an on-chain custody solution said. “Yes, the U.S. is the biggest market, but people who are building in the crypto industry are doing so not because of the size of the market now, but because of the size of the market in the future and people are seeing that this future is not looking good in the United States.”

Ben Caselin, Vice President & Chief Strategy Officer at centralized crypto exchange MaskEX, agreed. “All eyes are now set on other jurisdictions,” he said. “This is not the best time for crypto startups in the U.S. Larger players such as Coinbase are able and should engage the regulator to come to solutions, but entrepreneurs and small businesses in crypto are probably better off in other jurisdictions.”

For his part, SEC chief Gary Gensler signaled he’s not too worried about the prospect of crypto firms leaving the U.S. On Tuesday he told Bloomberg TV that “we don’t need more digital currency… we already have digital currency, it’s called the U.S. dollar.”

Fireblocks’ Allegrante said even though the U.S. might be the most profitable market for some exchanges, that may not be reason enough for them to focus all their efforts there. “When a company publicly announces plans to establish exchange operations outside of the United States, you can assume that there are plans in place to shift that balance over time,” Allegrante said about Coinbase.

Leituras Relacionadas

Gold Price Achieves Strongest Rally in 46 Years, Tokenized Gold Trading Volume Already Exceeds Full-Year 2025

Gold is experiencing its strongest rally since 1979, with prices reaching a record high near $5,600 per ounce in January. This surge is driven primarily by central banks, not retail investors. In 2025, central banks net purchased 863 tonnes of gold, with a similar increase expected in 2026. Traditional gold investment methods—physical bullion and ETFs—present trade-offs like storage issues, limited access, or management fees. Tokenized gold emerges as a third option: digital tokens representing ownership of physical bars stored in professional vaults. These tokens are globally transferable in seconds, divisible, and redeemable for physical metal. The potential impact mirrors that of dollar stablecoins. Stablecoins digitized the dollar, enabling cheap, instant, global transfers and driving adoption from $27 billion in 2020 to over $3 trillion today. Similarly, tokenized gold solves gold's "form problem"—its lack of divisibility, portability, and accessibility. Adoption is accelerating. In Q1 2026, tokenized gold trading volume hit $90.7 billion, surpassing the $84.6 billion for all of 2025. Its market cap exceeded $6 billion, growing 5.5 times faster than physical gold holdings in the quarter. While concerns about counterparty risk exist, tokenized gold represents a direct claim on allocated bars, with major issuers providing regular attestation reports. Just as stablecoins placed dollars on a digital, global rail, tokenized gold now offers a more practical form for this ancient asset, potentially expanding access to billions.

marsbitHá 17m

Gold Price Achieves Strongest Rally in 46 Years, Tokenized Gold Trading Volume Already Exceeds Full-Year 2025

marsbitHá 17m

Japanese Rates Return to 1996 Levels, Can Bitcoin Withstand the September Rate Hike?

Japanese borrowing costs have hit their highest levels since 1996, with yields on 30-year bonds reaching 4.185%. This marks a significant shift for a country long reliant on negative rates. Concurrently, Bitcoin surged 22% past $80,000, seemingly decoupled from the bond market turmoil. Historically, the massive yen carry trade has fueled global risk assets, predicated on near-zero Japanese rates. This assumption is now challenged. A potential rate hike by the Bank of Japan in September could strengthen the yen, forcing carry trade unwinds and potentially triggering a global deleveraging event, as seen in August 2024 when Bitcoin fell sharply. Conversely, if the yen weakens further, Bitcoin could attract Japanese investors as a hedge against currency depreciation and the country's massive debt burden. Institutional adoption in Japan is growing, with regulatory changes paving the way for potential crypto ETFs by 2027. The key variable is the BoJ's September policy signal. If it hints at a rapid tightening cycle to combat inflation and support the yen, risk assets like Bitcoin may face selling pressure from carry trade liquidation. However, if debt sustainability concerns limit its hawkishness, leading to a weaker yen, Bitcoin could benefit. Currently, the market is betting on a slow-motion debt crisis, not a sudden collapse. While Bitcoin shows resilience, its fate remains tied to the direction of the yen and the scale of any carry trade unwind.

marsbitHá 19m

Japanese Rates Return to 1996 Levels, Can Bitcoin Withstand the September Rate Hike?

marsbitHá 19m

How Can Bitcoin Resist Quantum Computers? A Comparison of Three Lattice-Based Signature Schemes

"Bitcoin's Quantum Defense: A Comparison of Three Lattice-Based Signature Schemes" by the Blockstream Research Team explores how Bitcoin can transition to quantum-resistant digital signatures, as current schemes like Schnorr and ECDSA are vulnerable to quantum computers. The report evaluates three lattice-based signature candidates—Dilithium, Falcon, and Hawk—against criteria like on-chain cost (key/signature size), implementation complexity, deployment risks, and support for Bitcoin's key derivation standard (BIP-32). The analysis recommends a minimum Security Level 3 for Bitcoin due to its long-term security needs. Dilithium (ML-DSA) is praised for its simplicity and integer-only operations, making it easier to implement securely, but it has the largest signature size (~5.3 KB for Level 3). Falcon (FN-DSA) offers the most compact signatures (e.g., ~3.1 KB for Level 5) and the fastest verification, though its signing requires complex floating-point sampling—a solvable engineering challenge. Hawk, despite its small size, was withdrawn from NIST standardization after a security vulnerability was discovered, highlighting the importance of conservative security margins. Currently, neither Dilithium nor Falcon has a fully viable, production-ready BIP-32 key derivation method. The report concludes that if a lattice-based scheme had to be chosen now, Falcon-1024 would be the preferred option for its balance of size, speed, and mature security assumptions. However, the short-term recommendation remains hash-based signatures (like SPHINCS+) for their lower risk, with a potential future hybrid or full transition to Falcon once its standard (FN-DSA) is finalized and well-supported.

marsbitHá 22m

How Can Bitcoin Resist Quantum Computers? A Comparison of Three Lattice-Based Signature Schemes

marsbitHá 22m

Trading

Spot
活动图片