jakiro
Author: daniel kuhn Source: Coindesk Translation: Shan Ouba, Bitchain Vision
A vote of the US Senate and the House of Representatives abolished a controversial accounting rule (SEC) accounting rules, which applied heavy capital requirements for cryptoclability institutions.This is a relatively important thing, because the so -called employee accounting announcement,That is, SAB 121 is one of the few provisions of the encryption and banking industry.
>
However, unfortunately,The legislative measure is now delivered to the desk of President Joseph Biden, who vowed to veto it to show support for SEC.Although many famous Democrats, including New York Senator Chuck Schume, voted to support the announcement, the Senate’s 60 votes on Thursday failed to reach the threshold for overthrowing the rejection of the president on Thursday.
It is difficult to interpret this voting result, and it seems to imply that legislators are willing to re -align through reasonable encryption regulations (or at least abolishment of bad regulations).However, there are many reasons to explain why it is reasonable to abandon the SAB 121. One of them is that the government accountability office of the non -party -free government found that the SEC forcibly passed the rule without proper Congress supervision.
Of course, Senator Elizabeth Warren, a skeptical attitude towards cryptocurrencies, voted to support the rules. She believes:“The unique risk of cryptocurrencies may have a serious impact on the company’s financial conditions. SAB 121 just clarifies how the company should deal with these risks in financial disclosure.”However, is the two parties support the abolition of the rules for other legislative efforts (such as the stabilization currency and the market structure bill for review)?
Divergence
“Although I don’t want to spill cold water, I don’t think that the Democratic Party supports the abolition of encryption accounting rules that means that the veto will not happen. I thinkThe “approval” vote in the Democratic Party’s opposition to the SBA 121 voting was because they knew that the White House would veto it.This is the negative cause and effect, “James Wester, the person in charge of Javelin’s encryption and the person in charge of the payment joint, said on X. Obviously, when you know that you will eventually be rejected, it seems easier to vote?
At the same time, Austin Campbell, deputy professor of Columbia Business School, said that the voting certificate on Thursday was a cross -party issue.”This is a problem in the United States, not a party,” he said.
In any case, the fragility of cryptocurrency legislation is worrying.A rule that has obtained most voting support for the two parties is widely criticized by industry people, and even one of the most important women, such as Nadine Chakar, is called “Stupid”.Founding the State Street Digital, now the encryption department of DTCC is now responsible for DTCC, and will speak on the Consensus 2024, but the rule may still exist.
This is not just a pure academic issue, because although SAB 121 is technically “no binding”, according to the Banking Institute (BPI), the American Banking Association (ABA), the Financial Service Forum (FSF), the securities industry and the securities industry and the securities industry and the securities industry and the securities industryThe public letter signed by the Financial Market Association (SIFMA) in February, it has affected the ability of financial institutions to enter the encryption custody business.
This is a bit of anti -factual question, but if a clear regulations have been formulated a few years ago, to what extent will it develop in areas such as stable coins and inter -bank blockchain railways?Obviously, regulatory uncertainty (and recent hostility) prevented enterprises from testing in the field of cryptocurrencies.For example, as Jeff John Roberts of Fortune Magazine recently wrote recently, some large custodian agencies will definitely be interested in all ETF Bitcoin.
Interestingly, 12 Democrats in the Senate can unite to help vote to overthrow a harmful rule, but I am not sure if the story of the SAB 121 is really so encouraging.
