5 key highlights of the SEC’s lawsuit against Binance

15 June 2023

Cointelegraph By Guneet Kaur

The SEC’s allegations against Binance include charges of misleading conduct, manipulative trading, diversion of customer assets and more.

Opinion

Join us on social networks

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) filed a lawsuit against Binance on June 5, alleging that the exchange was involved in the sale of unregistered securities. In its 136-page complaint, the SEC accuses Binance and its founder, Changpeng “CZ” Zhao, of participating in a complex conspiracy that involved fraud, conflicts of interest, a lack of disclosure and willful disregard for the law. 

The claims, according to SEC Chair Gary Gensler, center on deceiving investors about risk controls, tampering with trade volumes, hiding crucial operational data, and flouting U.S. securities laws. In order to avoid regulatory scrutiny, Binance allegedly created weak controls while secretly disobeying them to keep its highly valuable U.S. customers.

Today we charged Binance Holdings Ltd. (Binance); U.S.-based affiliate, BAM Trading Services Inc., which, together with Binance, operates https://t.co/swcxioZKVP; and their founder, Changpeng Zhao, with a variety of securities law violations.https://t.co/H1wgGgR5ir pic.twitter.com/IWTb7Et86H

— U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (@SECGov)

June 5, 2023

Here are the key highlights from the SEC’s complaint:

Unregistered securities offering

According to the SEC, Changpeng Zhao has been operating Binance.com and Binance.US as exchanges, brokers, dealers and clearing agencies since at least July 2017. The complaint claims that these companies have earned at least $11.6 billion through a variety of methods, including transaction fees collected from American clients.

According to the SEC’s complaint, Binance.com should have registered as a clearing agency, broker-dealer and exchange, while Binance.US and BAM Trading should have registered as clearing agencies and exchanges, respectively. BAM Trading also needed to register as a broker-dealer, and it was charged with the unregistered offer and sale of Binance.US’ staking-as-a-service program.

Controversial practice of allowing US customers to use Binance.com

Zhao launched Binance in Shanghai in 2017, but the exchange has been elusive about where its main office is located ever since. Binance’s parent company is situated in the Cayman Islands, which makes its organizational structure more complicated. The SEC alleges that, despite publicly claiming that Binance prohibited U.S. customers from trading, the exchange surreptitiously permitted them to keep using the platform, demonstrating a deliberate disregard for U.S. securities laws.

Binance created a sizable number of user accounts for people who provided Know Your Customer identity verification information that indicated their location within the United States from the initial launch of the Binance.com platform until at least September 2019. There were also users who appeared to be physically located in the United States based on their internet protocol addresses used to access the platform.

CZ as a control person

In order to develop Binance.US, a platform serving American clients in accordance with U.S. laws, Binance and BAM Trading announced cooperation in 2019. The SEC, in contrast to Binance.US’s assertion of independence, asserts that Zhao continued to be in charge of the company.

Notably, Zhao — according to the SEC — gave Binance.US the order to onboard Sigma Chain and Merit Peak as market makers, both of which were operated by Binance employees. Since the commencement of the Binance.com platform, the Zhao-owned Merit Peak has provided over-the-counter trading services on behalf of Binance. On the Binance.com platform, Merit Peak served as the counterparty for users, and on the Binance.US platform, it offered market-making services.

Related: SEC charges against Binance and Coinbase are terrible for DeFi

Starting at least in 2021, Binance entities that were under Zhao’s beneficial control transferred billion-dollar customer assets to American bank accounts held by Merit Peak. These funds were then subsequently transferred to Trust Company A (a New York limited purpose trust company), and it appears that this transaction was related to the issuance of Binance’s stablecoin known as Binance USD (BUSD). Investors were exposed to undisclosed counterparty risk as a result of using Merit Peak as an intermediary to move client funds to buy BUSD because this relationship was not publicly disclosed.

Moreover, many of Binance.US’s bank accounts, including one that had money from American customers, had the head of the back office as the primary operator, raising questions regarding Binance’s operational openness and fund segregation.

Wash trading on Binance.US platform

According to the SEC’s lawsuit, BAM Trading and BAM Management, who are connected to Binance.US, misled both clients and equity investors about the effectiveness of market oversight and measures to identify and stop manipulative trading on the platform. However, wash trading on the Binance.US platform was a common practice. This practice artificially inflates trading volumes, providing a fictitious impression of market interest. The SEC’s charges cast doubt on the reliability of trading volume data and the openness of Binance.US’s market activities.

Even before the platform’s launch, senior officials and staff at BAM Trading were well aware of the possibility of wash trading. In correspondence sent to BAM’s CEO — presumably Catherine Coley, though she is not identified by name — and senior Binance executives, a co-founder of Binance and the head of the trade matching engine team expressed concern about the matching engine’s ability to let customers trade with themselves. However, they questioned whether it was necessary to comply with U.S./SEC regulations and prevent this manipulation.

An employee of Binance who was in charge of market surveillance was contacted by BAM Trading when it was disclosed at a meeting a year later that no measures against market manipulation had been put in place. The director of institutional sales at BAM Trading acknowledged the absence of safeguards against wash trading in January 2021. Despite Binance.US explicitly professing to forbid fraudulent trading, BAM Trading did not have transaction surveillance systems in place until February 2022.

It is also noteworthy that a sizable percentage of this wash trading activity took place through accounts connected to Sigma Chain, which served as a market maker on Binance.US. Sigma Chain’s numerous accounts and active trading on the Binance.US platform were both fully known to BAM Trading and BAM Management.

Graphic contained in the SEC’s lawsuit depicting the alleged wash-trading volume of COTI.

Wash trading between Sigma Chain’s accounts continued after the platform’s introduction in 2019 until at least June 2022. For instance, following the introduction of the crypto asset security COTI on the Binance.US platform on April 6, 2022, Sigma Chain quickly — the SEC alleges — became involved in extensive wash trading . Strategically, the platform’s launch, the introduction of new securities, and the funding round all fell during times when investors and equity investors were most vulnerable.

Diversion of customer assets and misuse of funds by Zhao and Binance entities

In the SEC’s lawsuit, Zhao and Binance are charged with diverting customer assets at their discretion, including sending money to the Switzerland-based Sigma Chain that is under Zhao’s control.

The SEC claimed that Merit Peak and Sigma Chain were used to transfer tens of billions of dollars between Binance, Binance.US and other connected entities. Notably, the SEC disclosed that Sigma Chain spent $11 million purchasing a yacht. The accusation raises questions about how Binance and its affiliated organizations handle customer assets and suggests money may have been improperly used.

Additionally, the SEC charged that Merit Peak’s U.S. bank account has additionally been used as a “pass-through” account since the launch of the Binance.US platform, receiving roughly $20 billion — including customer funds — from both Binance platforms. Merit Peak then allegedly transferred the majority of this money to Trust Company A, possibly for the purpose of buying BUSD. This unnoticed transfer of consumer funds to an ostensibly independent company like Merit Peak posed a serious risk because it might have left the money vulnerable to loss or theft.

The extent of the alleged misappropriation of funds and diversion of customer assets will be further looked into and scrutinized as the judicial processes progress.

Guneet Kaur joined Cointelegraph as an editor in 2021. She holds a Master of Science in financial technology from the University of Stirling and an MBA from India’s Guru Nanak Dev University.

This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.

  

You might also like

Trump supports bill to buy 1 million BTC — Senator Lummis  
Trump supports bill to buy 1 million BTC — Senator Lummis  

US President Donald Trump supports the BITCOIN Act and has a team of experts in the White House working to roll out landmark digital asset legislation in the coming weeks, according to Wyoming Senator Cynthia Lummis. Speaking at the Bitcoin 2025 conference in Las Vegas, Nevada, Lummis said she is bringing the BITCOIN ACT to the “attention of the American people and the world,” adding that, “President Trump supports the bill.”In March, Lummis reintroduced the BITCOIN Act — landmark legislation that directs the US government to acquire 1 million Bitcoin (BTC) over five years. The acquisitions would be financed using existing funds within the Federal Reserve System and the Treasury Department. As Cointelegraph reported, the Trump administration has reiterated the need to use “budget-neutral ways” to acquire Bitcoin without burdening taxpayers.Source: CryptoGoosAt the Bitcoin Conference, Lummis said the Trump administration has a team working on “digital asset issues,” including legislation on stablecoins, market structure and the Bitcoin Strategic Reserve.“They will probably roll out in that order,” she said.“The Senate Banking Committee has passed the stablecoin bill out of committee,” said Lummis, adding: “We’re getting close to being ready to have it on the floor. We’ve worked for untold hours with the minority party to satisfy them, and we should be voting on it the week before we get back from this break.”Related: Senator Lummis’ new BITCOIN Act allows US reserve to exceed 1M BitcoinGENIUS Act on stablecoins is “going to pass,” says White House crypto czarThe White House seems to be in alignment with Senator Lummis. Last week, Trump’s top crypto adviser, David Sacks, said the GENIUS stablecoin bill is “going to pass” the Senate with bipartisan support after clearing a key procedural vote on May 19.On May 19, the Senate voted 66 to 32 to advance debate on the GENIUS Bill. Source: US SenateGENIUS refers to the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins Act, possibly the most comprehensive federal push to establish a legal framework for dollar-pegged stablecoins.Stablecoins have become one of the most prominent use cases for blockchain technology, with some industry advocates arguing that they could help extend the US dollar’s dominance as the global reserve currency.Collateralized, dollar-backed stablecoins like Tether’s USDt (USDT) and Circle’s USDC (USDC) account for more than 85% of the $250 billion market, according to CoinMarketCap.Related: Former CFTC chair criticizes STABLE Act amid calls for urgent regulatory clarity

Growing BTC reserve requires Congressional legislation — VanEck exec  
Growing BTC reserve requires Congressional legislation — VanEck exec  

Building a permanent US strategic Bitcoin reserve would likely require targeted legislation rather than executive action, according to VanEck’s head of digital assets, Matthew Sigel. Speaking at Bitcoin 2025 in Las Vegas, Sigel said the most viable path forward may involve inserting Bitcoin mining incentives into the congressional budget reconciliation process.According to Sigel, the most effective path to growing a US strategic Bitcoin reserve would be through targeted amendments to congressional budget legislation. These could include tax credits for mining companies that use methane gas and other incentives aimed at encouraging miners to share a portion of their mined BTC with the federal government. He argued that such an approach would allow the reserve to grow organically over time. Sigel also highlighted the limitations of executive actions in achieving this goal:”The problem with executive action is that it’s going to prompt lawsuits. And anything over $100 million is going to get sued by the Elizabeth Warrens of the world. So, I would say start with something maybe in the Exchange Stabilization Fund for $100 million.”US President Donald Trump established the US Bitcoin Strategic Reserve through a March 7 executive order. According to the order, the US government can only acquire Bitcoin through budget-neutral strategies or asset forfeiture, prompting a range of different ideas on how to add to the government’s stockpile of nearly 200,000 BTC.From left to right, Alex Thorn, Matthew Sigel, Matthew Pines and Fred Thiel. Source: Turner Wright/CointelegraphRelated: Bitcoin’s new highs may have been driven by Japan bond market crisisLawmakers, officials pitch different ideas to grow strategic Bitcoin reserveWyoming Senator Cynthia Lummis, the US lawmaker who introduced legislation for a Bitcoin strategic reserve in July 2024, proposed converting a portion of the gold certificates held by the US Treasury to Bitcoin.Converting gold to Bitcoin would allow the US government to purchase more Bitcoin without incurring a cost to the taxpayer, Lummis said.Bo Hines, the executive director of the President’s Council of Advisers on Digital Assets, echoed the idea in March 2025.Hines called on the US Treasury to revalue its gold holdings, which are currently priced at just $42.22 per troy ounce, and convert a portion of those gains to Bitcoin. This strategy would also be budget-neutral, Hines said.The price of gold reached an all-time high of $3,500 per ounce in April but experienced a minor pullback to around $3,300 on May 27.Magazine: TradFi fans ignored Lyn Alden’s BTC tip — Now she says it’ll hit 7 figures: X Hall of Flame

ZKPs can prove I'm old enough without telling you my age  
ZKPs can prove I'm old enough without telling you my age  

Opinion by: Andre Omietanski, General Counsel, and Amal Ibraymi, Legal Counsel at Aztec LabsWhat if you could prove you’re over 18, without revealing your birthday, name, or anything else at all? Zero-knowledge proofs (ZKPs) make this hypothetical a reality and solve one of the key challenges online: verifying age without sacrificing privacy. The need for better age verification todayWe’re witnessing an uptick in laws being proposed restricting minors’ access to social media and the internet, including in Australia, Florida, and China. To protect minors from inappropriate adult content, platform owners and governments often walk a tightrope between inaction and overreach. For example, the state of Louisiana in the US recently enacted a law meant to block minors from viewing porn. Sites required users to upload an ID before viewing content. The Free Speech Coalition challenged the law as unconstitutional, making the case that it infringed on First Amendment rights. The lawsuit was eventually dismissed on procedural grounds. The reaction, however, highlights the dilemma facing policymakers and platforms: how to block minors without violating adults’ rights or creating new privacy risks.Traditional age verification failsCurrent age verification tools are either ineffective or invasive. Self-declaration is meaningless, since users can simply lie about their age. ID-based verification is overly invasive. No one should be required to upload their most sensitive documents, putting themselves at risk of data breaches and identity theft. Biometric solutions like fingerprints and face scans are convenient for users but raise important ethical, privacy, and security concerns. Biometric systems are not always accurate and may generate false positives and negatives. The irreversible nature of the data, which can’t be changed like a regular password can, is also less than ideal. Other methods, like behavioral tracking and AI-driven verification of browser patterns, are also problematic, using machine learning to analyze user interactions and identify patterns and anomalies, raising concerns of a surveillance culture.ZKPs as the privacy-preserving solutionZero-knowledge proofs present a compelling solution. Like a government ID provider, a trusted entity verifies the user’s age and generates a cryptographic proof confirming they are over the required age. Websites only need to check the proof, not the excess personal data, ensuring privacy while keeping minors at the gates. No centralized data storage is required, alleviating the burden on platforms such as Google, Meta, and WhatsApp and eliminating the risk of data breaches. Recent: How zero-knowledge proofs can make AI fairerAdopting and enforcing ZKPs at scaleZKPs aren’t a silver bullet. They can be complex to implement. The notion of “don’t trust, verify,” proven by indisputable mathematics, may cause some regulatory skepticism. Policymakers may hesitate to trust cryptographic proofs over visible ID verification. There are occasions when companies may need to disclose personal information to authorities, such as during an investigation into financial crimes or government inquiries. This would challenge ZKPs, whose very intention is for platforms not to hold this data in the first place.ZKPs also struggle with scalability and performance, being somewhat computationally intensive and tricky to program. Efficient implementation techniques are being explored, and breakthroughs, such as the Noir programming language, are making ZKPs more accessible to developers, driving the adoption of secure, privacy-first solutions. A safer, smarter future for age verificationGoogle’s move to adopt ZKPs for age verification is a promising signal that mainstream platforms are beginning to embrace privacy-preserving technologies. But to fully realize the potential of ZKPs, we need more than isolated solutions locked into proprietary ecosystems. Crypto-native wallets can go further. Open-source and permissionless blockchain-based systems offer interoperability, composability, and programmable identity. With a single proof, users can access a range of services across the open web — no need to start from scratch every time, or trust a single provider (Google) with their credentials.ZKPs flip the script on online identity — proving what matters, without exposing anything else. They protect user privacy, help platforms stay compliant, and block minors from restricted content, all without creating new honeypots of sensitive data.Google’s adoption of ZKPs shows mainstream momentum is building. But to truly transform digital identity, we must embrace crypto-native, decentralized systems that give users control over what they share and who they are online.In an era defined by surveillance, ZKPs offer a better path forward — one that’s secure, private, and built for the future.Opinion by: Andre Omietanski, General Counsel, and Amal Ibraymi, Legal Counsel at Aztec Labs.This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.