A part of FTX survived, and its the case for the CLARITY Act

요약:Current federal crypto protections rest on revocable guidance, pilots, and letters rather than law, leaving investors unevenly protected by states and unguarded nationally. FTXs collapse proved the gap: its unregulated offshore exchange abused customer assets for years, while CFTC-regulated LedgerX survived intact because segregation was legally required and enforced. FTX operated offshore because Washington offered enforcement without clear rules, driving capital abroad; recent regulatory clarity has begun pulling firms back. The CLARITY Act would make the regulated, onshore model permanent, ensuring exchanges choose transparency over darkness, as Bullish, already regulated globally, now seeks CFTC registration.

So the protections stay what they are: at the federal level not law, but an interpretive notice sorting 16 tokens, a collateral pilot, a few no-action letters, a memorandum of understanding between two federal agencies, any of it revocable without a vote. The rest is left to the states, where investors get real protection in certain states, less elsewhere, and in some states none at all, none of it reaching a market that is national. The last great collapse already showed which protections hold and which give way.

When FTX failed, its offshore exchange misused its customers‘ assets for years. But several entities under the FTX umbrella — including LedgerX, a CFTC-regulated exchange and clearinghouse — came through the collapse whole, their customers’ assets segregated and intact. LedgerX survived for one reason: its protections were law. Not a clever mechanism but a plain one, customer segregation a regulator required and checked, which held whether or not anyone chose to honor it once the panic set in. The unregulated part of FTX ran on promises. In one collapse, under one roof, law held and promises broke.

FTX sat offshore for a reason. For years the United States met this industry with enforcement in place of rules, and its capital and talent went where the rules were clear, to Europe, Asia, and the Gulf. The rest went where there was no real oversight, and that is the gap an exchange like FTX grows in. When Washington started to offer clarity, the firms started returning to the U.S: Nexo came back after years away, London's Wintermute opened a New York office, and Switzerland's Taurus set up in New York to serve its bank clients. Law protects what it can reach, and the CLARITY Act would make that migration permanent instead of leaving the next firm to choose the dark. It would make the regulated, onshore model the norm for firms such as Bullish, a NYSE-listed digital asset market infrastructure firm (and the parent company of CoinDesk) already regulated in financial centres including Frankfurt, Hong Kong and New York, now pursuing CFTC registration as a designated contract market and derivatives clearing organization.

면책 성명

본 기사의 견해는 저자의 개인적 견해일 뿐이며 본 플랫폼은 투자 권고를 하지 않습니다. 본 플랫폼은 기사 내 정보의 정확성, 완전성, 적시성을 보장하지 않으며, 개인의 기사 내 정보에 의한 손실에 대해 책임을 지지 않습니다.
전편

OKX의 라피크, 클라리티 법안 통과에 회의적… 낙관론은 이미 비트코인 가격에 반영되어 있다고 경고

다음

BitMEX 매각, 창업자 소유권과 축소되는 사업에 대한 매수자들의 반대로 무산