What Binance’s US lawsuit says about the future for cryptocurrency regulation

(Andrew Urquhart, University of Reading and Hossein Jahanshahloo, Cardiff University) The world’s largest cryptocurrency exchange, Binance, has been hit with a lawsuit by US regulator the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). This is not the first time a cryptocurrency exchange has been charged by a regulator. But this particular case involves a regulator that does not directly oversee cryptocurrencies. This indicates how regulators – particularly those in the US – hope to clamp down on the cryptocurrency industry.

The CFTC’s lawsuit alleges that Binance violated US derivatives laws by offering its derivative trading services to US customers without registering with the right market regulators. It says Binance has prioritised commercial success over regulatory compliance.

The CFTC has also levied charges against Binance’s founder and CEO, Changpeng Zhao (known as CZ) and former chief compliance officer Samuel Lim. They are charged with taking steps to violate US laws, including directing US-based “VIP customers” to open Binance accounts under the name of shell companies. The regulator has pointed to chat messages as evidence of CZ and Sim’s knowledge of various criminal groups using the exchange.

People visit Binance nearly 15 million times a week to trade on the over 300 cryptocurrencies it offers in more than 1,600 different markets. CZ is an outspoken advocate for cryptocurrencies and regularly tweets about the industry and his company. He even tweeted a link to his initial response to the recent CFTC charges, which he called “unexpected and disappointing”. Promising full responses in due time, he said:

Upon an initial review, the complaint appears to contain an incomplete recitation of facts, and we do not agree with the characterization of many of the issues alleged in the complaint.

Last year CZ’s tweets arguably contributed to the collapse of FTX, one of his company’s main rivals. Binance saw its market share grow following FTX’s collapse.

So, this charge – against not only a crypto giant but also the company of an outspoken industry advocate – has created further upheaval in a market that has already suffered multiple crises in the last year. Investors withdrew a reported US$1.6 billion (£1.3 billion) from Binance within days of the CFTC’s announcement of its charges. These outflows could continue if US regulators tighten their squeeze on crypto companies further, causing major players like Binance to shift focus to other jurisdictions.

Creeping oversight

The CFTC aims to “protect the public from fraud, manipulation, and abusive practices related to the sale of commodity and financial futures and options, and to foster open, competitive, and financially sound futures and option markets”. Previous actions by this regulator in 2021 against Tether and Bitfinex resulted in major fines and a loss of credibility for the crypto industry.

But a statement published at the time by one of the CFTC’s five commissioners, Dawn Stump, pointed out that the CFTC doesn’t actually have responsibility for regulating cryptocurrencies. She warned that these fines might “cause confusion about the CFTC’s role in this area”. She said the action was based on defining stablecoins (a type of cryptocurrency) as a commodity, but: “we should seek to ensure the public understands that we do not regulate stablecoins and we do not have daily insight into the businesses of those who issue such”.

These latest charges against Binance focus on its activities in derivatives – financial contracts that are linked to the value of an asset such as oil or, in this case, cryptocurrencies. This is a market the CFTC does regulate.

Another US financial regulator, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), has also been ramping up its crypto oversight activities. As well as focusing on the Initial Coin Offering market, it saw a 50% increase in enforcement actions against digital asset companies last year compared to 2021.

Black and gold emblem of the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission in Washington, DC, brick wall background.

Crypto market changes

So, Binance is up against two powerful US financial regulators. Some experts have warned that “significant regulatory action could prompt Binance to increasingly shift its business operations beyond the United States”. Certainly, the fact that Binance held a 92% share of the crypto market at the end of 2022 means it facilitates many transactions and offers a lot of liquidity to traders around the world, including in the US.

A trader’s capacity to find competitive prices when buying and selling, as well as sources of liquidity (or other people to trade with) would be affected by the loss of or pull back of one of the world’s top ten crypto exchanges. This would be bad news for retail and institutional investors who could be confronted with a smaller and potentially more expensive market as a result.

And even if the complaints and investigations by the CFTC and SEC take a while to conclude, as is likely, the US legislature may step in before that. A report published by the Financial Times days after the CFTC announcement alleges that Binance has hidden links to China for many years. A statement issued by the the exchange to the FT said this is not “an accurate picture of Binance’s operations” and that the paper’s sources were “citing ancient history (in crypto terms)”.

But recent actions against Chinese tech company Huawei and social media platform Tiktok indicate political leaders are keen to crack down on Chinese companies’ access to US technology systems and customer data. So any similar concerns could lead US politicians to start acting in this area as well.

Andrew Urquhart, Professor of Finance & Financial Technology, ICMA Centre, Henley Business School, University of Reading and Hossein Jahanshahloo, Assistant Professor in Finance, Cardiff University

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

The Conversation

Tu opinión enriquece este artículo:

Antonela Roccuzzo y Stanley 1913 (el guiño a adidas): cuando las alianzas no dichas generan más valor (parte II)

(Por Otero, Maurizio, con la colaboración de Maqueda) La conexión Messi-Adidas (contrato vitalicio reportado en USD $200 millones) crea halo effect implícito para Stanley. No requieren co-branding formal: la asociación mental automática genera borrowed equity. Es el fenómeno que Kevin Lane Keller describe en "Strategic Brand Management" como secondary brand associations.

(Tiempo de lectura de valor: 4 minutos)

Franco Colapinto y el renacimiento del Celebrity-Driven Content: los Alfajores Havanna decodifican el futuro del marketing crossing global

(Por Maurizio, junto a Maqueda en la F1) Está en los medios… en las redes, en los programas de streaming y tv pero nosotros te lo explicamos como nadie: el piloto argentino ejecuta por tercera vez una masterclass de product placement orgánico con Havanna en la F1 que replantea las reglas del branded content en la era post-influencer, y alienta a todas las marcas a ingresar por la puerta grande al mundo del marketing crossing y la cultura del valor.

(Tiempo de lectura de valor: 4 minutos)

Miami: la ciudad que lo cambió todo ¿por qué los Martín Fierro Latinos se hicieron en la magic city?

(Por Ortega y Maurizio) ¿Por qué Miami? La pregunta responde sola cuando uno camina por Brickell Avenue un martes cualquiera y escucha a ejecutivos colombianos cerrar deals con inversionistas mexicanos, mientras actores venezolanos ensayan en estudios propiedad de productores argentinos, y cantantes puertorriqueños graban colaboraciones con brasileños.

(Tiempo de lectura de valor: 4 minutos)

Fútbol en Miami: la final que la posiciona como ciudad futbolera 3.0 (15 tips imperdibles)

(Por Ortega con la colaboración de Maqueda-Maurizio) En un partido que parecía destinado a confirmar la consolidación de un proyecto, Inter Miami remontó su estatus y dejó claro que, en la MLS 2025, la escala de valor de una franquicia ya no depende únicamente del tamaño de su estadio o de su plantilla, sino de la capacidad de generar impacto económico y emocional a escala global. 

(Tiempo de lectura de valor: 4 minutos)

Campeonato de Asado Argentino en Miami: cuando se enciende un fogón en Doral, se activa la economía (7.000 personas, marcas, personalidades y una impacto millonario)

(Por Galindez-Maurizio) El Campeonato del Asado Argentino no es un festival: es un modelo de negocio replicable que combina identidad cultural, experiencia inmersiva y rentabilidad económica. Norberto Spangaro (MIArgentina) y Blueteam no organizaron un evento: crearon un activo cultural valorado en millones.

(Tiempo de lectura de valor: 4 minutos)