ReportWire

Tag: FTX Bankrupt

  • FTX And IRS Lock Horns Over $24 Billion Tax Bill, FTT's Key Support Wavers

    FTX And IRS Lock Horns Over $24 Billion Tax Bill, FTT's Key Support Wavers

    [ad_1]

    In a striking turn of events, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) in the United States has presented a staggering tax bill of $24 billion against the bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange FTX. 

    FTX Challenges IRS’s $24 Billion Tax Bill

    According to court filings and FTX’s response to the IRS’s claims, several key arguments challenge the basis of the tax bill. Firstly, FTX highlights that its operations spanned three years, never distributing dividends or earnings. 

    Secondly, the exchange’s defense attorneys claim that the company incurred substantial losses rather than generating income that could support the IRS’s “exorbitant” tax claim. 

    Thirdly, the lawyers argue that FTX is currently in liquidation and is not engaged in any ongoing business activities apart from those required for the liquidation process. 

    Finally, the company emphasizes that the recovery sought by the IRS would ultimately come at the expense of FTX’s victims, as the funds would be redirected away from their rightful recipients. 

    As the court hearing approaches, FTX asserts that proceeding with a court-supervised estimation process would demonstrate the company’s significant losses during its operational period, rendering the IRS’s claim “baseless.” 

    FTX emphasizes that any forced payment would harm the victims of the FTX fraud, many of whom are already grappling with “profound losses.”

    FTX’s administrators have managed to recover approximately $7 billion in assets, including $3.4 billion in cryptocurrencies. These figures underscore the complex financial landscape surrounding the IRS’s claim against FTX.

    As the courtroom showdown ensues, the case outcome will undoubtedly have significant implications for the future of crypto taxation and the recovery prospects of FTX’s creditors. 

    FTT’s Bullish Trend Holds Strong

    As the cryptocurrency market experiences a significant correction following a bullish surge led by Bitcoin (BTC), FTX’s native token, FTT, has seen a decline of over 5% in the past 24 hours, adding to the company’s legal concerns.

    After a three-month accumulation phase that kept FTT trading in a range between $0.9 and $1.2 from September to the beginning of November, the token witnessed an impressive surge in the last month, reaching its highest price of the year at $6.042, a level not seen since November 2022.

    FTT’s loss of support at $5.1 on the daily chart. Source: FTTUSDT on TradingView.com

    However, the token has retraced to its current price mark of $4.8, with the next support level at $4.45 in case of further downward movement.

    On a positive note, FTT is trading above key moving averages, including the 200-day and 50-day MA, which provide support and indicate the potential for further upward price action.

    Furthermore, since the beginning of November, FTT has consistently recorded higher highs and higher lows, forming an uptrend pattern. This trend has been observed three times, with the token experiencing an uptrend, followed by a pullback for a support test, and then a continuation to reach new highs.

    Assuming this trend continues and the legal developments do not have a significant impact on the price of the token, FTT may be poised for a significant rise in the coming months, given the remarkable uptrend pattern seen on the daily chart.

    Featured image from Shutterstock, chart from TradingView.com 

    Disclaimer: The article is provided for educational purposes only. It does not represent the opinions of NewsBTC on whether to buy, sell or hold any investments and naturally investing carries risks. You are advised to conduct your own research before making any investment decisions. Use information provided on this website entirely at your own risk.

    [ad_2]

    Ronaldo Marquez

    Source link

  • From Crypto To Catch: Disgraced FTX Founder Turns To Trading Fish In Prison

    From Crypto To Catch: Disgraced FTX Founder Turns To Trading Fish In Prison

    [ad_1]

    According to a report by Business Insider, Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF), co-founder and former CEO of FTX, has adapted to the economic system of New York’s Metropolitan Detention Center (MDC), where he is currently awaiting sentencing on multiple felony counts. 

    The disgraced crypto-billionaire has reportedly been bartering, using food as currency in exchange for various services within the prison.

    Former FTX CEO SBF Trades Fish For Services

    Per the report, mackerel, a fish commonly referred to as “macks” among inmates, emerged as the currency of choice in federal prisons after cigarettes were banned. The fish’s popularity stems from its stability and value within the prison economy. 

    Formerly incarcerated individuals like attorney Larry Levin have accepted mackerel as payment from fellow prisoners, using it to acquire services such as beard trims and shoe shines. 

    The demand for mackerel became so significant that suppliers, including Global Source Marketing, witnessed increased sales, according to Business Insider.

    In a prison environment where inmates lack access to traditional or digital currency, products with steady value, such as certain food items and stamps, serve as substitutes for money. 

    Mackerel and other stable commodities like tuna become a means of exchange, with their value pegged to the dollar. This economic logic allows inmates to engage in various transactions while maintaining a semblance of a barter system.

    The use of fish as a medium of exchange in federal prisons has been widespread since 2004, following the cigarette ban. 

    Sam Bankman-Fried faces sentencing on March 28, 2024, for charges that include wire fraud and conspiracy to commit money laundering, with a potential prison term of up to 110 years. Additionally, SBF is set to stand trial for separate counts related to political bribery.

     FTT Surges with Impressive Gains

    FTT, the native token of the FTX cryptocurrency exchange, has seen a remarkable surge in value in recent weeks. With substantial gains across various timeframes and an impressive market capitalization of 1.5 billion, FTT has cemented its position among the top 50 tokens in the crypto market. 

    Over the past 24 hours, FTT has experienced a significant increase of 21%, showcasing the token’s upward momentum. This short-term surge is complemented by a strong performance over the past week, with a notable rise of 26%. 

    FTT’s uptrend over the past month on the 4-hour chart. Source: FTTUSDT on TradingView.com

    However, the real standout lies in FTT’s gains over the past 14 and 30 days. Within the last two weeks, FTT has skyrocketed by an impressive 100%, while the 30-day timeframe has seen an astounding surge of 315%. 

    These gains highlight the growing demand and investor interest in FTT as rumors of a possible reboot of the exchange circulate within the crypto community.

    Featured image from Bloomberg, chart from TradingView.com 

    [ad_2]

    Ronaldo Marquez

    Source link

  • FTX’s Sam Bankman-Fried Asks Court to Toss Criminal Charges | Entrepreneur

    FTX’s Sam Bankman-Fried Asks Court to Toss Criminal Charges | Entrepreneur

    [ad_1]

    Fallen FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried, aka SBF, thinks the court was too heavy-handed with the charges levied against him in December.

    On Monday SBF’s legal team asked Manhattan federal court to dismiss 10 of the 13 criminal charges against him, including the foreign bribery charge, campaign finance charge, and a bank fraud charge, according to the New York Times.

    Bankman-Fried was accused of misappropriating billions of dollars in customer funds in a fraud scheme between his FTX cryptocurrency exchange and his Alameda Research crypto trading firm. FTX filed for bankruptcy in November 2022 after a bank run exposed an $8 billion hole in the company’s accounts. SBF was arrested in the Bahamas and extradited to the United States in December. He is currently free on a $250 million bond as he awaits his trial, which is scheduled to start on October 2.

    SBF has pleaded not guilty to the 13 fraud and conspiracy charges against him. In the court filing, his legal team argues that 10 of the charges violate the extradition process or are too vague, stating that the prosecution has an “eagerness to run up charges against Mr. Bankman-Fried,” per NYT.

    RELATED: Who Is FTX Founder Sam Bankman-Fried and What Did He Do? Everything You Need to Know About the Disgraced Crypto King

    Additionally, his lawyers claim that prosecutors “rushed to judgment” in the wake of the broad market crypto crash in 2022.

    “Rather than wait for traditional civil and regulatory processes following their ordinary course to address the situation, the government jumped in with both feet, improperly seeking to turn these civil and regulatory issues into federal crimes,” his lawyers wrote in a court filing, according to Reuters.

    Prosecutors must respond to SBF’s dismissal request by May 29. U.S. District Judge Lewis Kaplan is scheduled to hear arguments on June 15.

    RELATED: From Tom Brady to Kevin O’Leary – See Who Lost Big in the Wake of the FTX Crypto Collapse

    [ad_2]

    Sam Silverman

    Source link

  • Failure of Silicon Valley Bank Could Reveal Surprising Extent of Corporate Fraud | Entrepreneur

    Failure of Silicon Valley Bank Could Reveal Surprising Extent of Corporate Fraud | Entrepreneur

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    The high-profile and sudden failure of Silicon Valley Bank — which has been accused of hiding huge losses from its depositors, investors, and regulators — highlights the dangers of corporate fraud for our financial system. It confirms the kind of problems highlighted by a recent study published in the Journal of Financial Economics, estimating that only one-third of corporate frauds are detected, with an average of 10% of large publicly traded firms committing securities fraud every year. This means that the true extent of corporate fraud is much larger than what is currently being reported. The study also estimates that corporate fraud destroys 1.6% of equity value each year, which equals $830 billion in 2021.

    These findings indicate a clear need for better risk management and oversight to address corporate fraud. As a highly experienced expert in this topic, I have consulted for many companies on how to mitigate the risk of fraud and the impact it can have on their business. In this article, I will share some insights and best practices for addressing corporate fraud, as well as some real-world examples of how this issue has affected companies.

    Related: ‘I Never Thought It Could Happen to Me’ — How to Avoid Business Fraud

    Real-world examples of corporate fraud

    While the situation with Silicon Valley Bank is still under investigation, we have plenty of well-known examples of fraud. FTX, a trading platform for crypto investors, was accused by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission of defrauding its investors by steering money from the company into another venture between 2019 and 2022. The company’s majority owner, Sam Bankman-Fried, allegedly used the cash to purchase homes in the Bahamas, invest in other companies, and fund favored political causes. When crypto assets took a significant plunge in 2022, the cash spigot went dry at both FTX and the other venture, leading to federal prosecutors stepping in to issue fraud charges and bankruptcy for the company.

    Theranos — initially heralded as an innovative healthcare technology company — was exposed as having unworkable technology in 2015. Federal and state regulators filed fraud charges against the company, which dissolved in 2018. The company’s founder, Elizabeth Holmes, and former president, Ramesh “Sunny” Balwani, were both found guilty and sentenced to prison in 2022. Top-tier investors such as Rupert Murdoch, Carlos Slim, and Betsy DeVos lost millions from Theranos investments, with little hope of getting the money back.

    Wirecard, an electronic payments firm based in Munich, Germany, faced the biggest corporate fraud case in German history in 2022, with former CEO Markus Braun and two senior executives facing multiple years in prison if convicted. Another senior executive, Jan Marsalek, is on the run and is reportedly hiding out in Russia. Wirecard declared insolvency in 2020 after authorities discovered $1.9 billion was missing from the company’s accounts, amid allegations from German regulators that the money never existed at all.

    Luckin Coffee, a China-based company, was embroiled in a legal quagmire stemming from a 2020 fake revenue scandal. Internal financial analysts discovered the company’s growth was artificially inflated due to bulk sales to businesses linked to the company’s chairman, and management had fraudulently engineered the purchase of raw materials from suppliers. When these investigations became public, investors fled and the company’s share price slid. With the company delisted from Nasdaq and the senior executives involved in the scandal out of the picture, Luckin Coffee is now trading over the counter.

    These are just several examples of serious fraud in the news. However, I’ve seen fraud occur in many smaller and mid-size companies as well. In fact, such occurrences in my experience are more common at smaller companies, which have less rigorous risk management and oversight policies.

    Related: Keep Your Business Fraud-Free With These 3 Steps

    Addressing corporate fraud through risk management and oversight

    To mitigate the risk of corporate fraud, companies — big and small — need to have strong risk management and oversight systems in place. This includes having clear policies and procedures for detecting and preventing fraud, as well as regular training and education for employees on how to recognize and report fraud.

    One important aspect of risk management is having an effective internal control system. This includes having a system of checks and balances in place to prevent fraud from occurring in the first place, as well as systems for detecting and investigating fraud if it does occur. This can include measures such as separating duties among employees, implementing segregation of duties and conducting regular internal audits.

    Another important aspect of risk management is having an effective compliance program. This includes having policies and procedures in place to ensure that the company is in compliance with relevant laws and regulations, as well as having a system in place for identifying and reporting any potential violations.

    Addressing cognitive biases that facilitate corporate fraud

    Cognitive biases can also play a role in corporate fraud, as they can lead individuals to make irrational decisions and overlook potential red flags. For example, confirmation bias can lead individuals to only pay attention to information that confirms their preconceived notions, while ignoring information that contradicts them. This can make it difficult for individuals to recognize and report fraud. Theranos might be an example: despite the lack of evidence for their technology working, stakeholders persistently refused to see this reality.

    The sunk cost fallacy is another cognitive bias that can lead to fraud. This occurs when individuals continue to invest in a project or venture, even if it is no longer viable because they have already invested so much time and resources into it. This can lead to individuals engaging in fraudulent activities in order to justify their previous investments. The situation with FTX falls into this category, with Sam Bankman-Fried refusing to accept losses at his crypto trading firm Alameda Research, and using customer funding from the FTX exchange to cover these losses.

    To mitigate the impact of cognitive biases on corporate fraud, companies need to be aware of these biases and take steps to counteract them. This can include regular training and education for employees on how to recognize and overcome cognitive biases, as well as implementing systems and processes that help to counteract these biases.

    For example, companies can implement peer review systems where multiple individuals review and approve financial transactions, rather than relying on a single individual. This can help to counteract the confirmation bias, as multiple individuals will be looking at the same information and can point out any potential red flags.

    Another example is implementing an independent fraud detection and investigation team within the company. This team can be responsible for reviewing financial transactions and identifying potential fraud. This can help to counteract the sunk cost fallacy, as the team will not be invested in the project or venture and can provide an objective assessment of its viability.

    Related: Yes, You Are Getting Scammed. How to Combat Fraud and Increase Efficiency

    Conclusion

    Corporate fraud is a serious issue that affects companies of all sizes and industries. A recent study published in the Journal of Financial Economics estimates that only one-third of corporate frauds are detected, with an average of 10% of large publicly traded firms committing securities fraud every year. This highlights the need for better risk management and oversight to address corporate fraud.

    Companies can mitigate the risk of fraud by having strong risk management and oversight systems in place, including an effective internal control system and compliance program. They also need to be aware of cognitive biases and take steps to counteract them, such as implementing peer review systems and independent fraud detection and investigation teams.

    As a highly experienced expert in this topic, I have consulted for many companies on how to mitigate the risk of fraud and the impact it can have on their business. I strongly recommend that leaders of companies take the necessary steps to address corporate fraud, in order to protect their bottom line and reputation.

    [ad_2]

    Gleb Tsipursky

    Source link

  • FTX Collapse Has Nervous Crypto Investors Draining Bitcoin From Centralized Exchanges

    FTX Collapse Has Nervous Crypto Investors Draining Bitcoin From Centralized Exchanges

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    holders are skittish following the dramatic collapse of the FTX exchange, according to analysts at Glassnode. Bitcoin (BTC) withdrawals have hit a record rate of 106,000 monthly, indicating that customers may be losing trust in third-party services.


    NurPhoto / Contributor | Getty Images

    Glassnode tweeted that there had been three other periods in recent years with similar withdrawal patterns, April and November 2020 and June to July 2022, when combined factors — including the Russian invasion of Ukraine and the failure of the Terra LUNA stablecoin — caused the crypto market to nose-dive.

    In the past, similar outflows have sometimes signaled a bull run. In this case, it’s much more likely to be a sign that investors have lost faith in big-name exchanges. As Markets Insider noted, these actions “suggest crypto investors are reconsidering how to manage their now that the once third-largest crypto exchange in the world has faltered and the value of the fortune built up by FTX’s founder Sam Bankman-Fried [has] now been wiped to $1.”

    CoinEdition quoted Hong Kong Digital Asset Operations Manager Alan Wong, who said that after FTX, “things will continue to simmer” and that with an $8 billion gap “between liabilities and assets, when FTX is insolvent, it will trigger a domino effect, which will lead to a series of investors related to FTX going bankrupt or being forced to sell assets.”

    Reuters reported Monday that FTX is under investigation by an alphabet soup of agencies, including the U.S. Justice Department and the Securities and Exchange Commission. As of 11:30 Monday night, Bitcoin was trading at $16,770 after dipping below the $16,000 mark earlier in the day.

    [ad_2]

    Steve Huff

    Source link

  • FTX’s Sam Bankman-Fried Gave Away His Flawed Decision-Making Months Ago

    FTX’s Sam Bankman-Fried Gave Away His Flawed Decision-Making Months Ago

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    “Let’s say there’s a game: 51%, you double the earth out somewhere else; 49%, it all disappears. Would you play that game? And would you keep on playing that, double or nothing?” Tyler Cowen asked Sam Bankman-Fried, the now-disgraced founder of the bankrupt cryptocurrency exchange FTX, in his podcast back in March 2022.

    The vast majority of us would not take the risk of playing that game even once. After all, it seems morally atrocious to take a 49% chance on human civilization disappearing for a 51% chance of doubling the value of our civilization. It’s essentially a coin flip.

    But Sam Bankman-Fried isn’t like the majority of people. He responded to this question by telling the podcast host that he is quite willing to play that game — and keep playing it, over and over again. Cowen asked Bankman-Fried about the high likelihood of destroying everything by going double of nothing on a series of coin flips. Bankman-Fried responded that he was willing to make this trade-off for the possibility of coin-flipping his way into “an enormously valuable existence.”

    Hearing that podcast made me realize the high-risk, high-reward decision-making philosophy that made his wealth possible — but also fragile. Indeed, he did end up in an enormously valuable existence — worth $26 billion at the peak of his wealth. He was the golden boy of crypto — lobbying and donating to prominent government figures, giving interviews to numerous high-profile venues and rescuing failing crypto projects. He was even nicknamed crypto’s J.P Morgan.

    His decision-making philosophy worked out for him — until it didn’t.

    FTX — the crypto exchange he founded, which represented the source of his wealth — filed for bankruptcy on November 11, along with 130 other companies associated with it. That filing stemmed from the revelation of some very shady bets and trades, which led to a run on the exchange and federal investigations for fraud.

    Related: ‘I’m Sorry. That’s The Biggest Thing.’ Sam Bankman-Fried and Cryptoworld Lose Big in FTX Meltdown, Company Files For Bankruptcy.

    Bankman-Fried resigned as CEO as part of the bankruptcy filing. His wealth — all tied up in FTX and related entities — shrank to near zero. His coin-flipping luck finally ran out.

    So what happened? As his financial empire was collapsing, Bankman-Fried tweeted: “A poor internal labeling of bank-related accounts meant that I was substantially off on my sense of users’ margin.”

    Certainly, we shouldn’t simply take Bankman-Fried’s word for the situation at hand, given the circumstances. Yet at least the atrocious bookkeeping part of the explanation and excessive optimism about user funds is supported by the only external investigation of the matter so far.

    Binance, the world’s biggest cryptocurrency exchange, originally offered to buy out FTX as FTX was collapsing. However, after taking a look at FTX’s books, they saw that the problem was too big to solve. Binance backed out, citing revelations of “mishandled customer funds” and describing “the books” as “a nightmare” and “black hole,” according to a person familiar with the matter.

    Messing around with customer funds is a big no-no. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), and Department of Justice (DOJ) are all investigating FTX’s handling of customer funds. Specifically, they’re examining whether FTX followed securities laws related to the separation of customer assets and trading against customers. Based on Binance’s statements when it backed out of the deal, and even Bankman-Fried’s own tweets, FTX very likely violated securities laws.

    Indeed, Reuters reported that Bankman-Fried built what two senior employees at FTX described as a “backdoor” in FTX’s book-keeping system, created using bespoke software. This backdoor enabled Bankman-Fried to execute commands that would not alert others, whether at FTX or external auditors. The two sources told Reuters that Bankman-Fried “secretly transferred $10 billion of customer funds” from FTX to Bankman-Fried’s own trading company, called Alameda Research.

    Bankman-Fried described his decision to move this money to Alameda as “a poor judgment call.” This coin flip landed the wrong side up. Double or nothing turned into nothing.

    The underlying story here is of a fundamental failure of compliance and risk management. The inner circle of executives at FTX and related companies, such as Alameda, lived together at a luxury penthouse and had very strong personal and romantic bonds. CoinDesk reported several former and current employees at FTX described the inner circle as “a place full of conflicts of interest, nepotism and lack of oversight.” Naturally, this context of personal loyalty at the top makes it hard to have any oversight and risk management. It allows things like secret software backdoors, shady bookkeeping and mishandling of client funds to flourish.

    Related: FTX’s Crypto Empire Was Reportedly Run By a Bunch of Roommates in the Bahamas Who Dated Each Other, According to the News Site That Helped Trigger the Company’s Sudden Collapse

    Such nonchalance toward risk management stems fundamentally from Bankman-Fried’s decision-making philosophy of high-risk, high-reward bets. Bankman-Fried is unquestionably a visionary and financial genius. One of the most prominent venture capital firms in the world, Sequoia Capital, invested $210 million in his company, and a partner at the firm said that Bankman-Fried had a “real chance” of becoming the world’s first trillionaire. Yet it ignored the serious dangers of Bankman-Fried’s decision-making philosophy.

    Bankman-Fried is not the only multi-billionaire who ignores risk management and oversight. Consider Elon Musk‘s approach to Twitter.

    After taking over the company, he fired the vast majority of the existing executive team and replaced them with a select inner circle loyal to him. Then, he started experimenting with various Twitter features, most notably selling blue checkmark verification badges for $8 a month without any mechanism for confirming a user’s real identity.

    Previously, Twitter only offered verification — for free — to those who had some public status and could prove it. After Musk’s offering, thousands of new accounts popped up with a blue checkmark impersonating real people and companies, such as an account that looked like Eli Lilly claiming that insulin is now free. Musk seemed very surprised by this outcome and paused the paid blue checkmark program in response.

    Let’s be honest — the outcome for Twitter in introducing paid blue badges was clearly predictable, and many publicly predicted it would go badly. Yet there was no meaningful risk management and oversight check on Musk’s actions, just like there was none over Bankman-Fried.

    The outcome of Musk’s risk-taking at Twitter might be bankruptcy, which would mostly be a loss for some big banks and investors. The outcome of Bankman-Fried’s risk-taking at FTX is definitely bankruptcy. That bankruptcy not only harms large investors — it also destroys the savings of thousands of ordinary people who held their money in FTX, given Bankman-Fried messed with customer funds.

    Bankman-Fried’s misdeeds also harm the many worthwhile charitable causes to which he donated, such as pandemic preparedness. A committed philanthropist who already gave away many millions focusing on evidence-based charities, Bankman-Fried raised hopes for inspiring billionaires to give away their wealth rapidly, just like MacKenzie Scott. However, many charity projects to which he promised funding are now in limbo, with their funding withdrawn; the employees at Bankman-Fried’s granting organization, the FTX Future Fund, resigned due to the revelations of misdeeds at FTX.

    Such harmful consequences from a lack of oversight and risk management highlight why it’s critical for founders to have someone who can help them make good decisions, manage risks and address blind spots. Such risk managers need to be in a strong position, able to go to the Board of Directors or other sources of insight. When I serve consulting clients in this role, I insist on being able to access this oversight body as part of my consulting contract. I almost never need to use this option, but having it available helps me rein in the double-or-nothing impulses of brilliant founders such as Bankman-Fried or Musk since they know I have that option.

    An important takeaway: If you’re deciding to make an investment with a seemingly brilliant entrepreneur, do your due diligence on risk management and oversight. If it seems like the entrepreneur has no one able to rein in their impulses, be wary. They will take excessive risks, and you’re gambling rather than investing your money wisely.

    [ad_2]

    Gleb Tsipursky

    Source link

  • What Happened to FTX, Why is Crypto Tanking and What is The Future of Web3?

    What Happened to FTX, Why is Crypto Tanking and What is The Future of Web3?

    [ad_1]

    Opinions expressed by Entrepreneur contributors are their own.

    FTX today. Celsius and BlockFi yesterday. A seemingly unending upheaval of “crypto giants” who have ultimately failed to protect consumers, breaking trust in the developing world of Web3. Why does this keep happening, and will there be more?

    First, the “why?” and then “who’s next?” (the short answer is ‘yes’ there will be more).

    Why do these cryptocurrency giants keep falling apart? The answer is a combination of greed and incompetence on the part of crypto exchanges and lenders combined with improper (or lack of) regulation. It all comes down to “balance sheet assets.”

    Related: ‘I’m Sorry. That’s The Biggest Thing.’ Sam Bankman-Fried and Cryptoworld Lose Big in FTX Meltdown, Company Files For Bankruptcy.

    Why balance sheet assets matter

    In the US, we see crypto exchanges and others obtaining simple money-transmitter licenses and holding investor assets (cash, crypto, securities, NFTs, etc.) on their balance sheets. Offshore, these entities have either no licenses or money-transmitter-type licenses that permit them to hold customer assets on the balance sheet. This means those assets are the exchange’s property (or lender’s) property.

    The customer’s assets become unsecured liabilities on that balance sheet. Now, since these are company assets, the company can use those for its benefit. They can lend them, invest them and do other things to juice corporate returns, which can go down in flames. And if a company goes out of business, others may have a superior claim on those assets over investors, including the government (taxes, fines), debt holders, and secured vendors. Customers get whatever might be left — if anything.

    Related: Celsius Network Files For Bankruptcy, Customers Unlikely to Get Money Back

    Balance sheets and FTX

    In the case of FTX, they are short $10 billion, which means that they made investments with the assets on the balance sheet to try and make money for the company (not the customers.) Then those investments went south, and there aren’t enough assets to cover investor accounts (unsecured liabilities on the balance sheet).

    The CEO said, “I’m sorry, I f***’d up,” which is true to the tune of $10 billion but never should have been permitted by regulation in the first place.

    Regulated entities that hold customer assets

    There are three types of “qualified” custodians — or firms that are regulated and required to take care of their customers:

    1. Trust companies
    2. Banks
    3. Clearing brokers

    Trust companies and clearing brokers can NOT hold customer assets on their balance sheets. They must keep them “FBO” (for the benefit of) customers. This means they can not comingle customer cash or other assets with company cash or assets. They have to be segregated. They can not be used or misused. And no third-party creditors have any claim on them.

    If a trust company or clearing broker fails, their regulator ensures an orderly transfer of assets to another financial institution. 100% of assets.

    Banks can hold customer assets on their balance sheet and invest them in making profits. This includes lending, stocks, bonds, life insurance pre-funds, credit card advances, letters of credit, etc., all using customer assets. If a bank makes terrible investments and fails, then, in this case, the FDIC steps in and makes up the difference between assets on the bank’s balance sheet vs. customer liabilities (up to $250,000).

    This is why the FDIC has onerous regulations on what banks can and cannot invest in and how much of their balance sheet they can invest into any particular thing, no matter how good it seems. It is tightly restricted, controlled and regulated.

    Related: 6 Things Good and Bad You Should Consider Before Investing in Cryptocurrencies

    Regulated entities and non-traditional assets

    Clearing brokers generally don’t hold private securities or tokenized assets (including cryptocurrency). There are a variety of deliberate and nuanced regulations that make it impractical for them to do this. Banks can not hold tokenized assets on their balance sheets, only in their trusts. While very few of those have the common forms of cryptocurrency (Bitcoin, Ethereum), none hold the vast array of cryptocurrency, private securities, real estate interests or tokens representing rewards programs, health care records, event tickets, collectibles, etc. That leaves trust companies as the only qualified custodian.

    Money transmitters — a risky regulatory loophole

    There is currently a regulatory loophole resulting in billions of dollars in consumer losses. A money transmitter is a state-by-state licensed entity originally intended for firms moving small amounts of cash point-to-point between people (which might temporarily land in the money transmitter’s account).

    Money transmitters carry these customer assets on their balance sheet instead of trust companies and clearing brokers who do not. Thus, the crypto industry has leveraged this loophole to get “licenses,” enabling them to hold assets on their balance sheets, and they can do stupid things with other people’s money. The regulation allows for this behavior.

    So, who is next?

    Ah, the multi-billion dollar question. There will be others. FTX is a giant shoe, as were Celsius and BlockFi. Brace yourself for more. By way of example, let’s talk about Coinbase.

    Coinbase issued a statement saying, “a note to the financial statements explains that as of June 2022, Coinbase has taken all customer assets onto its own balance sheet… it still has $12bn of its own and customers’ cash (both on its balance sheet).”

    The first thing that hit me when I read that was, “why the heck would they do that?!” They own a trust company, so why wouldn’t they keep all customer cash and crypto at their trust company to ensure it’s safeguarded and protected? Why would they put all those assets on the exchange, which only has money-transmitter licenses?

    I can only imagine that they can’t use other people’s money and crypto for their benefit if it’s at the trust company, but only if it’s at the exchange. Maybe there is something else, but I don’t see it. So the natural question is, “what exactly are they doing with those customer assets?” Possibly no different than what FTX was doing, maybe not. Without proper regulation, we can’t know for sure.

    Related: The US Government Monitors Crypto Markets as FTX’s Saga Continues to Unfold

    They might claim the assets are protected under UCC Article 8. Still, my understanding is that the protection is meant to apply to securities and, even then, attempts to put customer balance sheet liabilities ahead of other creditors on available assets in the event of company failure. It does not prevent the company from using customer cash and assets for its own interests and potentially losing those (like FTX.) So Article 8 wouldn’t matter much even if it is held to be applicable in a disaster scenario.

    And others?

    Yes, any firm operating as a simple money transmitter, what I call a pseudo-custodian, is capable of doing these things — which is all crypto exchanges that don’t use a trust company, whether their own or independent, all crypto lenders, etc.

    I respect the teams at Coinbase, Binance.us, Zero Hash, Bittrex, and other such money transmitters. I have no idea if they’ve used or misused customer assets or done anything intentionally ignorant or wrong. Maybe they are being as safe as they know how. But when you are permitted by lax regulation to use customer assets for your benefit, greed almost always prevails.

    Related: White House on Crypto: More Oversight is Needed to Avoid ‘Harming’ Americans

    Protect yourself and your customers

    How? Easy. If you have cash, crypto, NFTs, or other assets at any of these pseudo-custodians who operate with money-transmitter licenses, get it out of there. Now. Right now. Move it to a qualified custodian or self-custody. If you are a business working to bring crypto, digital assets, or other Web3 initiatives to your customers: only partner with a qualified custodian.

    Related: Solana Feels Ripple Effect of the FTX Collapse, Crypto.com Halts Solana, USDC and USDT Withdrawals and Deposits

    Next steps for the industry

    Regulation is (finally) coming. Legislation is coming. We, as an industry, don’t want another Dodd-Frank or Sarbanes-Oxley knee-jerk reaction that overcorrects a problem. The CEO of Fortress Trust, Albert Forkner is going out to work with members of Congress, including Senators Lummis and Gillibrand and Representatives McHenry and Waters, as they craft legislation. They will also work with the SEC, CFTC, CFPB and other government agencies on sensible regulation.

    In the meantime, we’re advocating for the states to modify their money-transmitter regulations to immediately retract and cancel licenses from any out-of-state entity other than trust companies, banks and clearing brokers.

    Regulation leads to the blue ocean for Web3

    Not in the slightest. The tokenization of rewards programs, real estate, healthcare records, insurance receivables, securities, event tickets, estate records, music, film, sports, photography, books, art and everything else electronic in the world is continuing without delay. These things — tokenized — so the blockchain acts as the ledger of record, are not cryptocurrency. Every company has Web3 initiatives, which will utterly transform the world as the internet did beforehand. Blue ocean continues for those in this space working to build for scale.

    [ad_2]

    Scott Purcell

    Source link