The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) faces scrutiny over its handling of cryptocurrency regulation following revelations from a 2018 email by William Hinman, the former Director of the Division of Corporation Finance. The email, dated June 4, 2018, outlines internal discussions about the regulatory status of Ether (ETH), sparking concerns about the agency’s impartiality.
Hinman’s email, titled “Ether Speech,” detailed plans to clarify Ether’s exclusion from securities regulation, providing the cryptocurrency with a distinct advantage. Although the email was specific to Ether, it failed to clarify the legal position of other cryptocurrencies, which has triggered more doubts over fairness in implementing the law in the digital assets market.
Also Read: Ethereum Whale’s Massive Sell-Off Sparks Concerns Over Market Impact
SEC’s Deliberations and Ether’s Exemption
The email revealed that the SEC sought to officially declare Ether as not requiring regulation as a security. This decision greatly benefitted Ethereum as its platform and the ETH cryptocurrency could run free from the rules of securities laws. Allegedly, Hinman planned to talk to Vitalik Buterin, the Ethereum co-founder, to understand better how the Ethereum network functions.
Hinman was preparing to give a speech on why Ether was being excluded from securities classification, and the speech draft was sent via email. The speech also helped create awareness or change Ethereum’s perception and treatment within legal corridors. The move helped Ether clarify its standing, leaving other cryptocurrencies wondering about their compliance status.
High-Level Coordination on Ether’s Regulatory Status
Hinman circulated his email to senior SEC officials, including Lucas Moskowitz, Sean Memon, Raquel Fox, Brett Redfearn, and Dalia Blass. They denied the progressive dysfunction that characterizes current organizational leadership and that communication was collegial; Hinman even asked for input on the draft of a speech he was giving. The fact that some of these are senior officials shows that the decision about Ether was deliberate and not a single case of personal opinion.
The language in the email showed transparency within the SEC about its regulatory stance on Ether. However, the selective approach has drawn criticism for potentially favoring one cryptocurrency over others, fueling debates about fairness in the SEC’s regulatory practices.
Conclusion
The release of Hinman’s 2018 email raises essential questions about the SEC’s consistency and transparency in regulating cryptocurrencies. The agency’s approach to Ether’s classification as a non-security has become a focal point in broader discussions about the need for clear and equitable guidelines for digital assets.
Also Read: Ethereum’s Layer-2 Networks Face Usability Challenges, Says Buterin
