US SEC "Encryption Mom": The cryptocurrency regulatory framework needs to be adjusted, and the SEC has forgotten that "change can also be beneficial"

Hess Peirce, a US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) commissioner, has been acclaimed for his support for Bitcoin, a former analyst who expressed concern about the way ETFs are regulated. . Although the distinction between securities and commodities is crucial, the cryptocurrency space continues to struggle due to conflicting answers.


In a recent interview, Peirce, commonly known as Crypto Mom, responded to the difficulty of classifying something as a security.

"Everyone is very dissatisfied with the lack of a clear answer to the SEC. Of course, there are some activities in the industry that really belong to our jurisdiction. However, the difficulty is that we have no precise definition of the meaning of securities because of the way securities laws work. ”

Although Peirce believes that there are some unique issues in the cryptocurrency that may require some adjustments to its regulatory framework, she is not sure "whether major adjustments are needed."

Peirce has ridiculed the US securities regulators, saying that the SEC "still kills ETFs and comforts their individualized concerns like babies."

According to the commissioner, the approach taken in this case is very “strict”. Peirce previously objected to the committee's order, but opposed the committee's disapproval of changing the rules and refusing to approve the Bitcoin ETF application filed by Bats BZX Exchange, Inc. and Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust. When talking about the basis of the objection, Peirce pointed out that

“When I look at the existing review criteria, we study potential markets in a way that seems inappropriate to me. Therefore, this is the basis of my dissent. I also believe that we disagree with this and Other actions related to exchange-traded products in this area are not very easy to accept innovation."

Hester Peirce further stated that the SEC's approach “reflects the deeper issues that regulators often face.” She added that these entities tend to think “change is dangerous” and often “forget” Change can also be beneficial.