TL;DR
Full Story
We’ve used this analogy twice already in the past — but man if it isn’t still relevant…
Remember that scene (☝️) in the seminal 1999 box office hit, Big Daddy?
The one where Adam Sandler and his semi-adopted son are playing cards, and no matter what hand the kid has – he moves the goal posts so he can bank a win?
It’s cute in the context of a movie, but when regulators pull similar moves, it just feels slimy.
Confused? Here’s what we’re on about:
There’re fears that the SEC is about to label the Ethereum token a security (think: a share in a company), instead of a commodity (i.e. an unchanging ‘thing,’ like gold or oil).
The basic argument from the SEC being that: ETH keeps updating and changing, therefore its a security.
While the argument from the crypto side is: sure, the Ethereum ecosystem keeps updating and changing, but the ETH token is still the same as its ever been (a vehicle for transferring value and paying for network fees).
Now, here’s where the shifting goal posts come in:
In October of last year, the SEC approved an Ethereum futures ETF to go live on US exchanges (aka: a way for traders to bet on the future price of Ethereum), classifying ETH as commodity in the process.
So to argue that ETH is all-of-a-sudden a security, goes against their past actions.
Good news:
The world of legal and political pain that this flip-flopping would bring upon the SEC is a big ol’ deterrent — potentially enough to stop them from doing it.
Bad news is:
By simply remaining tight-lipped about whether or not US companies are going to get the pants sued off them for building upon, or supporting Ethereum — the SEC can scare away a big chunk of US-based ETH adoption.
(And by proxy, “anything-that-isn’t-Bitcoin” adoption).
Rough!
