解读FIT21法案:美国加密市场监管及政治势力转变的新推手

Odaily星球日报Publicado em 2024-05-24Última atualização em 2024-05-24

Resumo

FIT21 是第一个试图全面定义美国应如何监管加密市场的法案。

原文作者:Avichal - Electric ϟ Capital

原文编译:深潮 TechFlow

美国众议院对 FIT 21 进行投票。拜登刚刚表示,他希望制定全面的加密货币法规。那么,

  • 什么是 FIT 21 ?

  • 为什么这项法案很重要?

  • FIT 21 对美国政治联盟和权力的变化有何启示?

解读FIT21法案:美国加密市场监管及政治势力转变的新推手

什么是 FIT 21 ?

FIT 21 是《 21 世纪金融创新与科技法案》, 是第一个试图全面定义美国应如何监管加密市场的法案。

FIT 21 有几个关键领域和条款:

  • 划定证券交易委员会(SEC)或商品期货交易委员会(CFTC)的管辖范围

  • 围绕发起人和代言人的透明度和披露提供消费者保护

  • 禁止机构阻止人们使用加密货币

  • 要求财政部研究稳定币

FIT 21 试图定义围绕去中心化系统的术语,以及网络何时足够去中心化,不再是一种证券。它引入了一个程序来认证资产是否足够去中心化,并将其标记为商品。这是一个巨大的突破。

解读FIT21法案:美国加密市场监管及政治势力转变的新推手

SEC 必须在 90 天内审查申请并做出答复。如果 SEC 认定某资产在没有控制实体的情况下运营,则该资产属于商品,美国商品期货交易委员会拥有管辖权。

对于怀疑美国证券交易委员会的人来说,这并不理想。但制定明确的规则是向前迈出的一大步。

那么,为什么 FIT 21 重要?

经过三年半的努力,我学到了第一件事:政治和立法的进步往往是渐进且不完美的,但偶尔也会有重大突破。

当你能把你想要的一些东西变成真正的法律时,那就接受它吧。

解读FIT21法案:美国加密市场监管及政治势力转变的新推手

FIT 21 并不完美,但它让我们更近了一步。我们不仅赢得了新的战斗,还在这盘棋上有加分。我们向全世界证明,我们知道如何把事情做好。而且我们可能好几年都不会再有这样的机会。

FIT 21 在参议院没有相应的法案。因此,它还不会成为法律。

今天的投票具有表演性质,但权力者 80% 都是在表演。

FIT 21 对美国政治联盟和权力的变化有何启示?

但谁在表演?为了谁?他们的表演告诉了我们什么?这些表演将告诉你世界将走向何方。

这次投票告诉我们:

  • 共和党从一开始就有关注这个议题

  • 民主党担心失去选票、资金,以及在这一问题上输给共和党

  • 民主党正在与伊丽莎白-沃伦决裂

  • 总统正在与沃伦决裂

权力中心正在转移,加密货币正在获胜。

@PatrickMcHenry 、 @RepFrenchHill @GOPMajorityWhip 和其他人多年来一直在为共和党人倡导加密货币。随着 5000 万美国加密货币持有者的成熟,他们已经为权力转移做好了充分的准备,这是对他们战略的极大验证。

如果你看看谁的意见在过去 6 个月里发生了变化,那就是温和的民主党。与投票推翻 SAB 121 的民主党类似 @RepRitchie ,@RepMoulton, @RepSlotkin 我们现在有像 Jim Himes 这样的人 @RoKhanna 与 @RepWileyNickel 他们的共和党同事一起投票。

解读FIT21法案:美国加密市场监管及政治势力转变的新推手

一年前,这可能会被总统迅速否决。 如今,白宫希望帮助澄清加密货币法规,并且不会否决这些法规。

180 °的态度大转弯。白宫工作人员将他们的同事们带到了这里。

解读FIT21法案:美国加密市场监管及政治势力转变的新推手

这一切意味着什么?它发出了什么信号?

  • 这表明温和的民主党已经意识到加密货币的重要性。

  • 这里有足够多的人可以左右选情。

  • 有足够的资金来帮助选举。

  • 民主党正在失去这些选民。

伊丽莎白-沃伦曾是科技和加密货币监管的重心。由于她在 2024 年之前让党失去了选票和捐款,她已经失去了很多权力。民主党现在已经发出信号,他们不想跟着沃伦一起被遗忘。

2025 年,参议院将在 SEC、CFTC、FDA、FTC 等任命新的委员。如果沃伦有权力,期待像 Gensler 这样的人。如果沃伦没有权力,我们也会得到 @HesterPeirce 这样的人 (注:作者指无论如何加密货币在美国政坛的影响力都会持续加深)

Leituras Relacionadas

The Full Story of How Crypto Unicorn Blockstream Is Mired in Serious Fraud Allegations

This article details serious allegations of fraud against Bitcoin infrastructure company Blockstream, founded by Bitcoin pioneer Adam Back. In June 2024, investigative account NatInfoSec published a report accusing Blockstream's mining note (BMN) program of potentially operating a multi-billion dollar scheme with Ponzi-like characteristics. The core allegations focus on Blockstream Mining Notes (BMNs), which offer investors fixed annual yields up to approximately 20% from Bitcoin mining. NatInfoSec's investigation raises several key issues: 1. **Suspicious Hashrate & Payout Capacity**: The analysis suggests Blockstream would need 20-45 EH/s of mining power to cover its BMN obligations, but its public dashboard shows only around 15 EH/s. Furthermore, no verifiable public evidence (e.g., grid connection records, import data) was found to support the massive mining operation required. 2. **Questionable Payout Source**: The BMN contract allows Blockstream to use Bitcoin from *any source* (Substitute Performance BTC) to fulfill investor payouts, raising concerns that payouts may not come from actual mining revenue. 3. **High-Risk, Fixed Returns**: Offering ~20% fixed yields in the volatile, cyclical Bitcoin mining industry is viewed as highly unusual and requires clear explanation. 4. **Undisclosed Criminal Record of Key Figure**: Christopher William Cook, a key figure in Blockstream's mining operations and CEO of spin-off Exacore, was found to have a federal felony conviction for mail fraud in 2008, a fact not disclosed in BMN offering documents. His background was also allegedly embellished. 5. **Potential Contagion to BSTR SPAC**: Questions were raised about whether these liabilities and Cook's record should have been disclosed in the SEC filings for Bitcoin Standard Treasury Company (BSTR), a separate Adam Back-associated firm planning a SPAC merger. The crypto community is divided. BitMEX Research validated Cook's criminal record and expressed concern over the high yields but found other evidence lacking or misleading, noting the legal separation between BMN, Blockstream, and BSTR. Blockstream defenders, like Samson Mow, argue the mining is real. Critics, however, emphasize the lack of independent, verifiable proof of the mining operation's scale and the true source of investor payouts. The article concludes that BMN remains shrouded in key unanswered questions regarding its actual size, the verifiability of its underlying mining assets and payouts, the source of its high yields, and the full role and disclosure concerning Chris Cook. Blockstream had not issued a comprehensive response at the time of writing.

marsbitHá 2h

The Full Story of How Crypto Unicorn Blockstream Is Mired in Serious Fraud Allegations

marsbitHá 2h

The Full Story Behind Encryption Unicorn Blockstream's Deep Entanglement in Serious Fraud Allegations

This article details allegations of serious fraud surrounding the crypto company Blockstream, founded by Bitcoin pioneer Adam Back. Investigation account NatInfoSec accuses Blockstream of raising billions through its Blockstream Mining Note (BMN) products, which offer high fixed yields of up to 20% from purported mining revenue. The core allegations are: 1) Blockstream's public mining hash rate (15 EH/s) appears insufficient to cover the massive payout obligations from sold BMN notes, raising questions about the true source of investor payouts. 2) Key executive Christopher William Cook, central to the mining operations, has a prior federal conviction for mail fraud, a fact not disclosed to investors. Cook's background and lavish lifestyle are highlighted as red flags. 3) The structure allows payouts from any source of BTC, not necessarily mining revenue, which critics argue gives it Ponzi-like characteristics. The controversy also touches on Bitcoin Standard Treasury Company (BSTR), a related entity planning a SPAC上市. Critics question whether BMN's liabilities and Cook's record should be disclosed in BSTR's filings. BitMEX Research offered a tempered analysis, confirming Cook's criminal record is likely true and the high yields concerning, but found other claims like insufficient抵押证据 less substantiated. Community debate centers on the need for verifiable proof of Blockstream's mining output and revenue. The article concludes that while fraud is not proven, BMN presents significant, unresolved questions regarding its actual scale, the source of its high fixed returns, the verifiability of its mining operations and payouts, and the full disclosure of associated risks and personnel backgrounds. Blockstream has not yet issued a formal response.

链捕手Há 3h

The Full Story Behind Encryption Unicorn Blockstream's Deep Entanglement in Serious Fraud Allegations

链捕手Há 3h

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片