The Federal Reserve’s recent enforcement actions against crypto-friendly banks have raised questions about Vice President Kamala Harris’s crypto “reset” campaign. This article examines the implications of these actions, the reactions from key industry figures, and what it means for the future of crypto regulation in the U.S.
Points
- The Fed’s enforcement action against Customers Bank, a crypto-friendly institution, has sparked speculation about the sincerity of Kamala Harris’s crypto “reset” campaign.
- Critics argue that the Fed’s actions reflect ongoing hostility towards the crypto industry, despite Harris’s campaign rhetoric.
- Prominent figures like Tyler Winklevoss and Charles Hoskinson have expressed concerns about the U.S. administration’s approach to crypto regulation.
- The enforcement action requires Customers Bank to provide a 30-day advance notice before entering new crypto-related banking relationships.
The cryptocurrency community in the United States is once again in the spotlight as the Federal Reserve takes a firm stance against crypto-friendly banking institutions. This time, the enforcement action is directed at Customers Bank, a well-known ally of the crypto industry. The Fed’s recent move has ignited a debate about the sincerity of Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign to “reset” relations with the crypto sector, with many questioning whether the administration’s actions align with its words.
On August 9, Gemini co-founder Tyler Winklevoss took to X （formerly Twitter） to voice his concerns, claiming that the Fed’s enforcement action is evidence that Operation Choke Point 2.0 is still very much in effect. This operation, as many in the crypto space believe, is a coordinated effort by U.S. regulatory bodies to stifle the growth of the cryptocurrency industry by cutting off its access to banking services.
Winklevoss’s comments suggest that the Harris campaign’s promise of a “reset” with the crypto industry may be nothing more than a political maneuver. The 13-page enforcement action against Customers Bank requires the institution to provide a 30-day advance notice before entering any new banking relationships with cryptocurrency companies. This move is seen by many as a continuation of the Fed’s restrictive approach to crypto banking, effectively limiting the ability of crypto companies to operate within the U.S. financial system.
Adding to the chorus of criticism, Charles Hoskinson, the founder of Cardano, echoed Winklevoss’s concerns. Hoskinson has long been a vocal critic of the U.S. government’s stance on cryptocurrencies, and he believes that the current administration, led by President Joe Biden, is actively working against the crypto industry. According to Hoskinson, voting for Harris in any future election would be detrimental to the U.S. crypto industry, as it would likely continue the so-called “war on crypto.”
The timing of the Fed’s actions against Customers Bank has only fueled speculation about the administration’s true intentions. Many in the crypto community see the enforcement action as part of a broader strategy to centralize decision-making power within the Federal Reserve, rather than allowing individual banks to make their own decisions about whether to work with crypto companies.
In July, a group of U.S. lawmakers and congressional candidates from various districts sent a letter to Democratic National Committee Chair Jaime Harrison, urging the party to adopt a more progressive stance on digital assets and blockchain technology. These lawmakers argue that embracing innovation in the crypto space could position the U.S. as a leader in the global digital economy. However, the Fed’s recent actions seem to contradict this vision, leading to further uncertainty about the future of crypto regulation in the U.S.
Between March and August 2023, the U.S. banking sector experienced a period of significant upheaval, marked by the collapse of several banks that catered to crypto businesses, including Silvergate Bank, Signature Bank, and Silicon Valley Bank. The Fed’s crackdown on Customers Bank is seen by many as a continuation of this trend, raising concerns about the long-term viability of crypto-friendly banking in the United States.
For the crypto industry, the implications of these enforcement actions are profound. If banks continue to face restrictions on their ability to work with crypto companies, it could stifle innovation and drive businesses to seek more favorable regulatory environments overseas. This could ultimately weaken the U.S.’s position as a global leader in the burgeoning digital asset market.
解説
- The Fed’s enforcement action against Customers Bank highlights the ongoing challenges facing the U.S. crypto industry, despite promises of a “reset” from the Harris campaign.
- Critics argue that the administration’s actions reflect a broader hostility towards crypto, potentially hindering the industry’s growth and innovation within the U.S.
- The enforcement action requiring a 30-day notice before entering new crypto-related banking relationships could further limit the ability of crypto companies to operate in the U.S., prompting them to explore opportunities in more crypto-friendly jurisdictions.