The current Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), led by Chairman Gary Gensler, is facing significant regulatory concerns regarding Bitcoin spot ETF applications. Former SEC attorney John Reed Stark believes that these concerns, primarily centered around preventing fraud and protecting investors, make it unlikely for the SEC to approve such applications. Interestingly, the issue of crypto regulation has led to a partisan divide within the SEC, marking a dramatic shift from the bipartisan consensus against cryptocurrencies when Stark first started addressing the subject in 2017.
The growing partisanship within the SEC is evident through its crypto crackdown initiated by former SEC Chair Jay Clayton, who was appointed by Republicans. Clayton was known for his strong criticism and extensive regulatory actions against cryptocurrencies. However, Stark suggests that the regulatory landscape could change significantly after the upcoming 2024 U.S. presidential election. If a Republican candidate is elected, he predicts a substantial decrease in the SEC’s crypto-enforcement efforts. This reduction could potentially create a more crypto-friendly environment, where the SEC becomes more receptive to approving a Bitcoin spot ETF and implements other favorable regulatory actions.
Potential Leadership Changes
Stark points out that as an independent federal agency, the SEC is subject to leadership changes following presidential elections. In the event a Republican candidate is elected, Hester Peirce, nicknamed the “crypto-mom” by Stark due to her support for cryptocurrencies, could become the acting Chair, resulting in the probable resignation of the current Chair, Gensler. Peirce’s dissension towards most crypto-related SEC actions may significantly impact the SEC’s stance on cryptocurrencies and its approach to Bitcoin spot ETFs.
In addition to political considerations, Stark also highlights various concerns raised by Better Markets, an organization focused on financial market reform. In a letter to the SEC, Better Markets outlined issues with the proposed rule changes that would enable the listing and trading of spot Bitcoin ETFs. These concerns include the potential for manipulation in the Bitcoin market, with allegations of “wash trading” artificially inflating trading volumes. Better Markets argues that the proposed surveillance-sharing agreements with platforms like Coinbase are inadequate for detecting manipulation, given that Coinbase represents only a fraction of global Bitcoin trading. The organization also emphasizes the risk associated with concentrated Bitcoin ownership, where a small number of miners control a significant portion of the mining capacity, and the top 10,000 Bitcoin wallets own a substantial percentage of the total supply.
Stark concludes that the SEC’s decisions on Bitcoin ETFs and related regulatory matters will likely be influenced by several factors. Internal politics within the SEC, as well as the broader political landscape, will play a role in shaping the regulatory stance. Ongoing concerns about market manipulation and investor protection are also significant considerations. However, given the current political spectrum, Stark does not believe that a spot Bitcoin ETF will be approved without substantial changes to the regulatory landscape.
The approval of Bitcoin spot ETFs by the SEC remains uncertain. The partisan divide within the SEC, the potential impact of the 2024 U.S. presidential election, concerns regarding market manipulation, and the viewpoints of key individuals within the SEC all contribute to the complexity of the regulatory landscape. As the crypto industry continues to evolve, it will be interesting to observe how the SEC navigates these challenges and adapts its approach to cryptocurrencies and Bitcoin spot ETFs.