There is so much to like in the speech that SEC Commissioner Atkins gave last Friday. Here are some of my favorite parts:
“So today, I would like the world to go on notice that under my leadership, the SEC will not stand idly by and watch innovations develop overseas while our capital markets remain stagnant.”
“Many of the Commission’s legacy rules and regulations do not make sense in the twenty-first century—let alone for on-chain markets. The Commission must revamp its rulebook so that regulatory moats do not hinder progress and competition—from both new entrants and incumbents—to the detriment of Main Street.”
“Federal securities laws have always assumed the involvement of intermediaries that require regulation, but this does not mean that we should interpose intermediaries for the sake of forcing intermediation where the markets can function without them.”
“As I have said before, the right to have self-custody of one’s private property is a core American value. I believe deeply in the right to use a self-custodial digital wallet to maintain personal crypto assets and participate in on-chain activities like staking.”
sec.gov/newsroom/speeches-st…
Tyler Meade retweeted
We’ve partnered with @DinariGlobal, the leading provider of tokenized U.S. public securities, to offer our customers greater liquidity, transparency, and the same economic rights as the backing security, where permitted.
Yesterday's memo from @TheJusticeDept entitled "Ending Regulation by Prosecution" is another step toward sensible crypto policy. But it incorrectly includes Gemini Trust Company on a list of companies that collapsed and filed for bankruptcy. No Gemini entity has ever filed for bankruptcy. We are alive and well!
While visiting the Deutsches Museum last month, I took in this view and thought: “Where would we be today if, at some earlier moment in time, we stopped innovating?” Shown here is a continuum of old transistors, circuits, and other electrical components—all precursors to modern tech, each representing some useful iteration on what existed before. Hats off to those who innovate, and those who make innovation possible. Let’s continue to build.
I had the pleasure of reading an advance copy of Principles of Bitcoin. For those who want to go beyond the platitudes and reflexive reactions, read this book. @VijaySelvamXO makes a data-driven, first-principles case for Bitcoin. Along the way, he deftly explains how it aligns with core American values—our embrace of individual freedom and distrust of concentrated power. Elegantly written, this book will be studied in universities and policy circles from coast to coast. It is already a best seller on Amazon—even before its release date.
PRINCIPLES OF BITCOIN: Technology, Economics, Politics and Philosophy
Published by Columbia University Press, foreword by Alex Gladstein
Available for delivery in the US starting March 31, 2025
What is the book about? And what makes this #Bitcoin book different? 🧵👇
We are absolutely thrilled that Dan has joined our team!
I’m thrilled to announce that I’ve joined @Gemini as its Chief Financial Officer. I will be working alongside @cameron and @tyler and the incredible team at Gemini to unlock the next era of personal, financial, and creative freedom.
Crypto is the most dynamic sector in finance and Gemini is at the forefront of this revolution — making it simple and secure to engage on the digital asset frontier.
Previously, I spent the last 2+ years at @Affirm as the VP of its Capital Markets and Bank Partnerships teams, growing access to secured funding to over $20 billion.
I’m looking forward to helping Gemini scale by driving financial strategy as the company enters its next phase of growth.
Let’s build! 🏗️🚀
Tyler Meade retweeted
1/ It's been a while since I've shared some product updates from @Gemini and we've been busy. Some highlights over the last few months below:
Tyler Meade retweeted
On Monday, the SEC informed our litigation counsel @JackBaughman27 that it has closed its investigation into @Gemini and will not be pursuing an enforcement action against us. This comes 699 days after the start of their investigation and 277 days after they sent us a Wells Notice.
While this marks another milestone to the end of the war on crypto, which already includes the SEC’s withdrawal of the Coinbase lawsuit and the closing of investigations into OpenSea, Robinhood, and UniSwap, it does little to make up for the damage this agency has done to us, our industry, and America.
The SEC cost us tens of millions of dollars in legal bills alone and hundreds of millions in lost productivity, creativity, and innovation. Of course Gemini is not alone. The SEC’s behavior in aggregate towards other crypto companies and projects cost orders of magnitude more and caused unquantifiable loss in economic growth for America.
How many engineers left crypto or avoided it altogether because of these regulatory attacks? How many projects were never started or got off the ground because founders and engineers decided they would rather build a startup in their dorm room than inside the boardroom of a law firm trying to navigate the Kafkaesque crypto regulatory hellscape? How many engineers chose to go into other industries instead of building a permissionless, open financial system? How many years of innovation were kicked down the road at the expense of Americans? We will never know.
So where do we go from here? It’s wholly unacceptable for an agency like the SEC to bully, harass, and attack a lawful industry and then decide one day to simply say we’re good and walk away. Unless there is a cost and price to be paid for this behavior, it will happen again. Thoughtful legislation will form a shield of protection, but we also need strong deterrence inside the agencies themselves. Here are a few ideas:
Reimbursement
If an agency refuses to write rules before it opens an investigation or brings an enforcement action, the agency should have to reimburse you for 3x your legal costs. This would make you financially whole for the time and money you spent defending yourself against sham investigations and baseless enforcement actions that were only able to be brought because the agency didn’t write rules in the first place. Even better, they should be required to advance you your legal costs so you don’t have to come out of pocket while you defend yourself.
Dishonorable Discharge
Everyone involved in these actions should be fired immediately and in a public way. Their names, roles, and the actions they participated in should be posted on the SEC website.
How many SEC enforcement lawyers have resigned in protest since the SEC top brass instructed them to withdraw crypto cases and close investigations? Zero. Which means they never believed in these cases to begin with. Which begs the question, why didn’t these lawyers resign at the outset when they were told to bring these unjust cases?
It should not be acceptable to bring the full might of the US government to bear against fledgling companies in a nascent industry and then hide behind a faceless agency or say you were “just doing your job” or “following orders.” These individuals had a choice. They could have asked to be reassigned or resigned. Nobody was forcing them to work at the SEC. Nonetheless, they chose to violate their oath and the agency’s mission to “make a positive impact on the U.S. economy, our capital markets, and people’s lives” and instead aided and abetted an unlawful war against a lawful industry.
Imagine if even one SEC enforcement lawyer had resigned in protest and stood up for our industry — what a heroic act this would have been. But it never happened.
Agency Ban
Just like the SEC bars individuals from trading securities if they break the law, there should be a process that bars those like Gary Gensler who weaponize the law, as well those who participate in the weaponization, from ever being appointed to or hired by an agency again. Lifetime ban in this case.
Going Forward
We will not rebuild trust and integrity in federal agencies unless there are serious consequences for bad faith actors. Operation Chokepoint didn’t stop at 1.0. It continued to 2.0 because not enough was done to hold bureaucrats accountable for their actions during 1.0. And there will be a 3.0 unless there is a real, public reckoning for 2.0.
I’m glad to be turning the page here as an industry, but this is not the end, rather the beginning towards ensuring this never happens again to the crypto industry or any other exciting, new frontier industry in the future. Here’s to continuing to reform our government and fighting the good fight. Amazing awaits
Tyler Meade retweeted
We were right. This was not a collective delusion. If they can do this to crypto they can do this to anyone.
Judge Bibas’ concurring opinion in Coinbase v. SEC, No. 23-3202 (3d Cir. 2025), is also notable for his assessment of Gensler’s actual motive—a de facto ban on crypto. In line with the industry view, he wrote that "the SEC has sidestepped the rulemaking process by pursuing a de facto ban through enforcement instead,” and then mused, “One might wonder if an agency whose mission is maintaining fair, orderly, and efficient markets is authorized to ban an emerging technology.” Good question.
The Court did not address that issue, as it was not properly before it. But I’ll share my view: It is not the prerogative of a small group of regulators to snuff out an entire industry, especially not one that aims to redesign the global financial system, the Internet, and money in a way that provides greater choice, independence, and opportunity for all. That would be an exercise of far too much power by an unaccountable few.
In short, Gensler set a very dangerous precedent with his ill-conceived campaign to kill crypto in the U.S.
In case you missed it, Judge Bibas of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently encapsulated the reason for my industry’s fury against the Gensler-led SEC in three concise sentences. The opening paragraphs of Coinbase Inc. v. Securities and Exchange Commission, No. 23-3202 (3d Cir. Jan 13, 2025), frame the issue in the case:
“Coinbase … petitioned the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to promulgate rules clarifying how and when the federal securities laws apply to digital assets like cryptocurrencies and tokens. Coinbase argued in its petition that the existing securities-law framework does not account for certain unique attributes of digital assets, which make compliance economically and even technically infeasible…. [¶] The SEC denied Coinbase’s rulemaking petition. In a single paragraph, it explained that it disagreed with the petition’s concerns; that it had higher-priority agenda items—namely, everything else it was doing….”
The Court held that the SEC’s terse response was not sufficiently reasoned and, thus, was arbitrary and capricious. That holding is not at all surprising.
More significant is Judge Bibas’ concurring opinion in which he outlines “a constitutional issue that … lurks beneath” this holding. In Judge Bibas view, the SEC’s “haphazard enforcement strategy” targeting “entities that are trying to follow the law” (his words, not mine) raises due process concerns, which he summarized as follows:
“The SEC repeatedly [sued] crypto companies for not complying with the law, yet it [did] not tell them how to comply. That caginess creates a serious constitutional problem; due process guarantees fair notice. “[R]egulated parties should know what is required of them so they may act accordingly ….”
In case you missed it, Judge Bibas of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit recently encapsulated the reason for my industry’s fury against the Gensler-led SEC in three concise sentences. The opening paragraphs of Coinbase Inc. v. Securities and Exchange Commission, No. 23-3202 (3d Cir. Jan 13, 2025), frame the issue in the case:
“Coinbase … petitioned the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to promulgate rules clarifying how and when the federal securities laws apply to digital assets like cryptocurrencies and tokens. Coinbase argued in its petition that the existing securities-law framework does not account for certain unique attributes of digital assets, which make compliance economically and even technically infeasible…. [¶] The SEC denied Coinbase’s rulemaking petition. In a single paragraph, it explained that it disagreed with the petition’s concerns; that it had higher-priority agenda items—namely, everything else it was doing….”
The Court held that the SEC’s terse response was not sufficiently reasoned and, thus, was arbitrary and capricious. That holding is not at all surprising.
More significant is Judge Bibas’ concurring opinion in which he outlines “a constitutional issue that … lurks beneath” this holding. In Judge Bibas view, the SEC’s “haphazard enforcement strategy” targeting “entities that are trying to follow the law” (his words, not mine) raises due process concerns, which he summarized as follows:
“The SEC repeatedly [sued] crypto companies for not complying with the law, yet it [did] not tell them how to comply. That caginess creates a serious constitutional problem; due process guarantees fair notice. “[R]egulated parties should know what is required of them so they may act accordingly ….”
Tyler Meade retweeted
Great post (if you’re not familiar with Paul’s essays, go on his site and read a bunch! Some gems in there). Two things from this,
1. Our founders have direct relationships with folks across the firm at every level, and I like and encourage it. They will do stuff and connect directly with my reports and below outside of my purview - that is good! Engage directly with the people that matter for what you need to accomplish. Leads into my next point which is a recent interesting thing that happened to me
2. We recently hired someone from a similar business. Senior guy, was there many years. Said he’d only spoken to the coo once! I spent an hour in a file with him elbow to elbow directly working on it to finalize. And I thought to myself, am I doing something wrong that my peer doesn’t do this? but I think I’m doing something right. This person was also below the manager who reports to me
For those who don’t know, this book is an absolute must read for anyone wanting to understand the digital asset space. And it should be read more broadly too, as it sheds important light on innovation in general.
A year ago today, Read Write Own was released. So much has happened in crypto since then.
The past year, I spent a lot of time traveling and speaking at events—some crypto-focused, some not. Even as crypto faced regulatory uncertainty in Washington and sustained criticism from mainstream media, I kept hearing something different from the people I met: passion and optimism. There was a clear gap between the narrative out there and what I was seeing on the ground.
So, while I’m excited to see the tides turn with growing bipartisan and institutional support, I’m not entirely surprised. Crypto was never going away. At some point, the value of what blockchains enable—stablecoins, DeFi, AI systems, games, social experiences, and more—had to be recognized. We’re still far from the full vision I described in Read Write Own, but we’re moving forward.
Huge thanks to all the founders, builders, and supporters who tuned out the noise and kept building. Onward.
Tyler Meade retweeted
There needs to be a “single action rule. Right now, when something goes wrong you can be investigated by multiple federal agencies and multiple state agencies, for the same thing. This is crazy.
I have had clients investigated by the SEC, CFTC, OCC, FED, the New York AG, the Manhattan DA, and agencies of other states for the exact same conduct. This is insane. It is just regulators piling on and “taking a piece.”
Sometimes things go wrong. And good regulation has its role. But we have lost the plot entirely.
Redundant agencies create inefficiency. Countless federal agencies cover the same “turf” which creates confusion (e.g. SEC/CFTC), many of them regulate activities that are *already regulated* by states (e.g. Nuclear Regulatory Commission), while others still take money from states only to give it back to states (e.g. Dept of Education). This is nonsensical. Restructuring isn’t an option, it’s a necessity.
Tyler Meade retweeted
People need to understand just how wrong this was. This is unelected bureaucrats picking winners and losers: choosing who gets to participate in the financial system. Imagine if the FDIC pressured banks not to offer services to your industry. Or to people who look like you.
Tyler Meade retweeted
Law abiding American businesses should be able to access banking services without government interference. The incoming administration has the opportunity to reverse so many poor crypto policy decisions, chief among them politically motivated regulatory decisions like Operation Chokepoint 2.0. 3/3
Well done Coinbase in aggressively pursuing their FOIA action against the FDIC. That federal regulators engaged in a secret and concerted effort to de-bank crypto can no longer be doubted.
JUST IN: U.S. banks were told to keep their distance from crypto, according to @FDICgov letters that @coinbase execs argue are a smoking gun proving that debanking was the government's plan.
@jesseahamilton reports.
trib.al/BR9LHjp
