CointactedDecember 13, 2023
2 Comments
Binance, Binance.US and Changpeng Zhao argued that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) did not meet the requirements of the “Howey Test” in its suit against the two companies and their founder in a new filing Tuesday.
Binance and Zhao, more commonly known as “CZ,” filed a reply to the SEC alongside Binance.US, which submitted its own separate but similar filing arguing that the SEC did not show that the exchanges’ U.S. customers had any contracts that would meet the definition of an “investment contract,” or that other elements of the Supreme Court case were met.
It’s the latest bid to dismiss the lawsuit filed by the federal regulator in June when the SEC alleged that Binance and Binance.US allowed the general public to buy and trade unregistered securities by listing certain cryptocurrencies and offering a staking service.
Binance, which recently settled different charges with the U.S. Department of Justice, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, Office of Foreign Asset Control and Financial Crimes Enforcement Network, filed to dismiss the SEC lawsuit in September, arguing the regulator was overreaching its authority (it made a similar argument in a filing to dismiss a CFTC suit in July).
In Tuesday’s filings – which are responding to the SEC’s own reply to the motion to dismiss – both Binance and Binance.US argued that the regulator hadn’t shown there were any obligations to the exchange’s users after they purchased certain cryptocurrencies, suggesting there was no investment contract as needed by the Howey Test.
DOJ settlement
Binance also pushed back against the SEC, adding the exchange’s guilty plea with the DOJ and consent order with FinCEN, or Zhao’s own DOJ plea, in the ongoing case.
The SEC argued that the settlements showed that Binance was well aware it was operating in the U.S., serving U.S. customers and otherwise tapping infrastructure within the U.S. for transactions.
“Zhao’s and Binance’s plea agreements and the Consent Order provide further grounds for this Court to deny the Joint Motion to Dismiss,” the SEC said.
In another Tuesday filing, Binance argued that securities laws wouldn’t apply like the Bank Secrecy Act or International Emergency Economic Powers Act (two laws governing the charges Binance and Zhao settled) did.
“Jurisdictional admissions under the BSA do not bring any of the SEC’s claims within the reach of the securities laws,” Binance and Zhao claimed.
The filing also argued that the settlements and consent order didn’t implicate securities laws.
“That facts in the plea agreements with the Department of Justice show that BHL and Mr. Zhao violated the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) does not say anything about whether there was fair notice of the SEC’s theory that the crypto assets at issue were securities under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act,” the filing said.
Edited by Sam Reynolds.
The ongoing legal battle between the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and cryptocurrency exchange Binance has taken another turn as Binance asserts that the SEC has not met the legal requirements to sue the company. In its latest bid to dismiss the lawsuit, Binance is pushing back against the SEC’s allegations, adding a new layer to the regulatory challenges faced by one of the world’s largest cryptocurrency exchanges.
The SEC filed a lawsuit against Binance in 2021, alleging that the exchange sold securities, including digital tokens, without registering with the regulatory body. The lawsuit is part of the SEC’s wider crackdown on the cryptocurrency industry, as regulators seek to bring digital assets within the traditional framework of securities laws.
In its defense against the SEC’s lawsuit, Binance is arguing that the SEC has failed to satisfy the legal requirements to bring the case. The exchange claims that the SEC has not provided sufficient evidence to support its allegations and has not met the legal standard for bringing a lawsuit.
Binance’s latest legal maneuver is part of its effort to push back against the regulatory scrutiny it faces in the U.S. and other jurisdictions. The exchange has been working to address regulatory concerns and strengthen its compliance measures in response to the evolving regulatory landscape for cryptocurrencies.
In the midst of this legal battle, the outcome of the lawsuit holds significant implications for the cryptocurrency industry and the regulatory oversight of digital assets. As the SEC continues to assert its authority over cryptocurrencies, the outcome of this case could set a precedent for how regulators approach the regulation of digital assets in the future.
Leave your vote
0 Points
Upvote Downvote
Browse and manage your votes from your Member Profile Page
More
- Report
