Latest news about Bitcoin and all cryptocurrencies. Your daily crypto news habit.
Multiple respondents have filed comments with the U.S. SEC on the latest proposed rule change for the VanEck/SolidX Bitcoin ETF.
Multiple respondents have filed comments with the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) on the latest proposed rule change for the VanEck/SolidX Bitcoin (BTC) exchange-traded fund (ETF). Comments to date were submitted between Feb. 13 and March 12.
As reported, CBOEâs BZX Equity Exchange â the exchange that would prospectively list the Bitcoin ETF â had temporarily withdrawn its application for a rule change on the ETF in January, citing the negative impact of the U.S. government shutdown on the SECâs operations. CBOE then resubmitted the application for the SECâs consideration at the end of the month.
On Feb. 19, the SEC announced that it would shortly be commencing the formal countdown period to approval or disapproval of the product, soliciting feedback from the public.
Among the seven comments filed thus far, six strongly urge the regulator not to approve the VanEck/SolidX proposal.
The sole response that affirms the positive value of the Bitcoin ETF approval is from respondent Sami Santos on March 12, who engages with the SECâs previously given rationale for disapproving other ETF proposals:
â[Disapproval of] an ETF because of manipulation and [...] the protection of investors is contradictory, because without an investment fund the investor is susceptible to buy bitcoins in deregulated exchanges and lose their investments.â
Noting that VanEck âoffers insurance to cover possible losses,â Santos argues that ETF approval would create greater market security in providing more âliquidity, transparency and safe custody of assets that will have credibility for large investors.â
The lengthiest negative comment â from respondent Sam Ahn on Feb. 13 â focuses on Bitcoinâs lack of intrinsic value. Ahn accuses the ETF applicants and the 2008 Bitcoin white paper itself of âgrand[ly] exaggerat[ing]â the mathematical complexity involved in Bitcoin mining. The applicantsâ wording, he claims, âworks like a moat around the castle of bitcoin mining, keeping us away from the reality of bitcoins.â
Other, more concise comments â echoing Ahn in part â focus on Bitcoinâs alleged lack of value as a financial product, its volatility and market manipulation âby the very few.â Â One respondent, D. Barnwell, does provide an argument that proposes:
âI would ask the SEC [...] to take a 'watch and wait approach' [...] [t]he true game changer is the underlying technology Blockchain, not the cryptocurrency. And to make inroads into this industry-changing technology, one does not need to have a financial product based on the cryptocurrency.â
As previously reported, SEC chairman Jay Clayton has recently stated that there âmay be a case where a Bitcoin ETF could satisfy our rules.â Â He suggested the technology is âdemonstrating significant promise in the places where itâs consistent with our approach to capital raising in the past.â
As Cointelegraph reported yesterday, the SEC is also soliciting industry input as it potentially reconsiders existing custody rules in specific cases of digital asset trading and settlement.
Disclaimer
The views and opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not reflect the views of Bitcoin Insider. Every investment and trading move involves risk - this is especially true for cryptocurrencies given their volatility. We strongly advise our readers to conduct their own research when making a decision.