Ripple CEO Slams Gary Gensler on “Regulatory Clarity” Claim


Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse recently attended a three-day annual conference organized by Aspen Security Forum. The conference was intended to discuss the various critical national security issues.

Garlinghouse Denies Gensler’s Claim about Regulatory clarity

A day before Ripple CEO addressed the conference, at the same event SEC Chairman Gary Gensler echoed his opinion on the regulatory clarity concerning digital currencies in the US. Gensler stated that SEC is awfully clear on a bunch of regulatory matters concerning digital assets as he mentioned that the agency has brought 75 cases in the digital assets sector.

In response to Gesler’s statement CEO Garlinghouse asserted that the agency chief’s claim that they have clarity on the regulatory matters concerning digital assets is like as if some alcoholic person is claiming that he does not have the problem. Garlinghouse stated:

For years, I think the crypto industry has asked for that clarity, and yesterday we heard it is clear,[…] This is the elephant in the room.

Garlinghouse mentioned SEC commissioners’ contradictory statement when they admitted “a decided lack of clarity for market participants around the application of the securities laws to digital assets and their trading.

Wants Clarity, But not Through Enforcement

He also denied Gensler’s claim of bringing 75 market-related cases as said out of 75, 37 were related to ICOs[initial coins offerings], many of which were fraud cases and the other 37 did not involve the sale of digital assets. He asserted only one of those 75 cases was out of ICOs.

Mentioning proactive and engaging behaviors of other G20 countries like Japan, Singapore, Switzerland, and the UK, Garlinghouse stated regulatory clarity is the prerequisite if the US wants to be the leader in the market.

Garlinghouse said as a US-based company he wants to see the US thriving in the market:

I want to work with the US government to provide clarity, to provide certainty. But trying to provide that clarity through enforcement action is not, I think, the right answer,



Source link

Leave a Reply