ShapeShift Settles SEC Charges It Sold Crypto Securities

CoinDeskPolicyОпубліковано о 2024-03-05Востаннє оновлено о 2024-03-06

Анотація

The federal regulator instituted a cease-and-desist against ShapeShift, which dissolved its U.S. crypto exchange in 2021.

  • The Securities and Exchange Commission filed a cease-and-desist against crypto exchange ShapeShift, barring it from operating as an unregistered dealer in the U.S. that listed crypto securities.
  • ShapeShift offered to settle the charges, which the SEC said it accepted.
10

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed a cease-and-desist against ShapeShift, a crypto exchange that previously operated out of Denver, Colorado, but has since shut down its U.S. exchange operations, alleging it operated before 2021 as an unregistered dealer for cryptocurrencies that were securities.

As part of Tuesday's filing, the SEC said it would accept a settlement offer by ShapeShift, which included a $275,000 fine and an agreement that the company would no longer violate the Securities Exchange Act.

ShapeShift offered "at least 79 crypto assets" to its customers, which included "those that were offered and sold as investment contracts," the filing said, though it did not name any specific digital assets as being securities.

Advertisement
Advertisement

However, it said the exchange operated as an unregistered dealer in the U.S. between 2014 and 2021, an accusation similar to the one the SEC brought against other U.S. crypto exchanges like Coinbase, Kraken and Binance.US.

"ShapeShift regularly bought and sold crypto assets for and from its own accounts, carrying inventory in – and holding itself out to customers as willing to buy and sell – the crypto assets offered on ShapeShift.io," the filing said.

The company shut the U.S. exchange in 2021, the SEC said.

A footnote also noted that the findings in the cease-and-desist "are not binding on any other person or entity in this or any other proceeding."

Neither SEC spokespeople nor ShapeShift founder Erik Voorhees immediately responded to requests for comment.

Edited by Nick Baker.

Пов'язані матеріали

Citi Research Report Analysis: U.S. Proposed Ban on Chinese Optical Modules Has No Substantial Progress, Short-term Enforcement Faces Supply Constraints

Citi Report Analysis: U.S. Proposed Ban on Chinese Optical Modules Lacks Substantive Progress, Faces Supply Bottlenecks in Short Term. Reuters reported on August 4th that the U.S. government and FCC are considering a ban on Chinese optical modules. Citi's August 9th report clarifies that optical modules are not listed on any effective FCC ban. The FCC's Order 26-50 established two restricted list mechanisms (based on manufacturer and production location), but optical modules were only mentioned once, as an example in a disclosure requirement, not as a restricted product. The reported ban remains at a proposal stage. Citi estimates Chinese suppliers provide 60-70% of high-speed optical modules for U.S. hyperscalers. Non-Chinese suppliers cannot fill this gap in the short term, making the immediate implementation of a genuine ban unlikely. Future regulatory paths could be manufacturer-based (least likely), location-based covering all offshore production (strictest), or location-based covering only China (more feasible but with unresolved definitions). A ban would pressure U.S. AI infrastructure, conflicting with stated policy goals. Citi sees low near-term implementation probability, with the issue potentially becoming a negotiation chip in bilateral talks. U.S. domestic capacity build-out is a key long-term variable. Among Chinese companies, XSENS and Dongshan Precision have the highest U.S. exposure, while Tianfu Communication, as a passive component supplier, is relatively insulated. Citi maintains Buy ratings on all three with respective price targets. The conclusion is that Chinese modules are currently irreplaceable in the U.S. AI supply chain, creating a longer timeline for potential restrictions than the market may expect.

marsbit10 хв тому

Citi Research Report Analysis: U.S. Proposed Ban on Chinese Optical Modules Has No Substantial Progress, Short-term Enforcement Faces Supply Constraints

marsbit10 хв тому

Lead Analyst Claims Bitcoin is at a Critical Stage: 'We are at the Bear Market Bottom, What Happens Next…'

Renowned cryptocurrency analyst Benjamin Cowen, in his latest analysis video, examined recent events and historical cycles in the Bitcoin market. Noting Bitcoin's trading range of $64,000 to $65,000, Cowen stated that market dynamics and investor interest show similarities to past cycles, suggesting the upcoming period marks a critical turning point. Cowen observed a significant decline in public interest and investor enthusiasm for the crypto market, with social risk metrics falling to 0.2, far below levels seen four years ago. He added that market volatility has notably decreased, and a sense of distrust prevails among investors, drawing parallels to the ends of bear markets in 2018 and 2022. Historical data indicates Bitcoin markets typically bottom in summer months, followed by a period of stagnation with low volatility, implying a major move could occur in the year's final quarter. However, Cowen noted on-chain indicators like the MVRV Z-Score have not yet signaled a definitive bottom. Cowen believes an event in the coming weeks could shake the market, potentially triggering a final sell-off wave. Such an event, he argues, would bring investors back and pave the way for a new bull cycle. He predicts October as the most likely bottoming period, while acknowledging September or November are also possible, advising crypto users to remain cautious and prepared for a decisive market moment.

cryptonews.ru19 хв тому

Lead Analyst Claims Bitcoin is at a Critical Stage: 'We are at the Bear Market Bottom, What Happens Next…'

cryptonews.ru19 хв тому

Bitcoin Community in Uproar: Deciphering the New Scaling War Sparked by BIP-110

On August 10, Luke Dashjr, a long-time Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) editor and co-founder of Ocean mining pool, was removed from the BIP editing team for bypassing discussion protocols and preemptively assigning a number to BIP-110, a controversial soft fork proposal he helped draft. The conflict stems from Bitcoin Core's version 30 release in October 2025, which removed the default 83-byte limit on OP_RETURN, a field used for embedding non-transaction data. In response, BIP-110 aimed to enforce this limit as a consensus rule. It controversially lowered the activation threshold for miners to 55% and included a mandatory activation clause, causing significant community backlash. Major mining pools like Foundry USA and AntPool did not support it, with public criticism from figures like F2Pool's Wang Chun and Michael Saylor, who argued it compromised Bitcoin's neutrality. On August 8, at block height 961,632, nodes running the BIP-110 patch rejected the main chain block, causing a chain split. The minority chain, supported by only about 2.53% of the network's hash rate, produced just one additional block before stalling. The main chain quickly outpaced it by over 240 blocks. No major exchanges have supported the minority chain. The event highlighted Bitcoin's governance reality: while rules can be proposed by a few, ultimate authority lies with the economic majority—miners willing to expend hash power and users/exchanges recognizing a chain's validity. Following the failed split, BIP-110 proponents, including Luke Dashjr, have begun discussing a change to the proof-of-work algorithm to create a separate coin, though this remains in early discussion stages.

marsbit40 хв тому

Bitcoin Community in Uproar: Deciphering the New Scaling War Sparked by BIP-110

marsbit40 хв тому

Торгівля

Спот
活动图片