SEC charges against Binance and Coinbase are terrible for DeFi

10 June 2023

Cointelegraph By Guneet Kaur

The SEC’s charges against Binance and Coinbase could have far-reaching consequences for decentralized finance.

Opinion

Join us on social networks

The allegations against Binance and Coinbase by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission have substantial ramifications for the decentralized finance (DeFi) ecosystem, and they are far from positive. DeFi has developed as a promising area within the crypto industry, aiming to disrupt established financial systems and deliver financial services in a decentralized manner.

However, the latest charges against these centralized exchanges raise doubts about the future of DeFi. By targeting Binance and Coinbase for suspected violations of securities laws and operating unregistered exchanges, the regulator seems to be imposing its authority on an industry that thrives on independence and autonomy.

Here’s why such charges are terrible for DeFi.

Solana, Matic, Algorand and other tokens targeted

DeFi’s strength comes from its decentralized protocols, smart contracts and decentralized applications that empower users and eliminate the need for intermediaries. Nonetheless, such a legal conflict against centralized exchanges challenges the essential concepts of DeFi. It appears like regulators are seeking to suppress innovation and reestablish control over a fast-expanding business.

Moreover, the SEC’s accusations against Binance and Coinbase might have a chilling effect on DeFi projects, leading to uncertainty among developers and entrepreneurs about pursuing new and breakthrough concepts. This could hinder the potential expansion and evolution of DeFi, limiting its ability to disrupt and improve established financial institutions.

Related: Kevin O’Leary won’t rule out criminal charges in Binance ordeal

In the Binance lawsuit, the SEC argues that tokens such as Solana’s SOL (SOL), Cardano’s ADA (ADA), Polygon’s MATIC (MATIC), Filecoin (FIL), Cosmos’ ATOM (ATOM), The Sandbox’s SAND (SAND), Decentraland’s MANA (MANA), Algorand’s ALGO (ALGO), Axie Infinity Shards (AXS), and COTI (COTI) are securities. Another notable cryptocurrency deemed a security by the SEC is Ripple’s XRP (XRP).

Such charges have significant ramifications for the DeFi ecosystem, considering the high market capitalization and prominent position these cryptocurrencies have. The SEC’s allegations imply that they would need to conform to the legislation and registration procedures relevant to regular securities. This would introduce a huge barrier for the DeFi projects utilizing these coins and might potentially hinder their growth and innovation.

One immediate concern is the potential impact on liquidity and trading activity linked to these coins. If their categorization as securities limits market accessibility or results in a lessened price impact, it might drastically curtail the options accessible to DeFi customers. Moreover, this could impair the overall effectiveness and efficiency of decentralized protocols.

Binance’s BNB ecosystem would face a $200 million liquidation if its price were to fall below $220, according to DeFiLlama data.

Single largest liquidation in DeFi.

— whalechart (@WhaleChart)

June 9, 2023

Another concern arises from the compliance duties created by recognizing these coins as securities. DeFi projects would face higher expenses and administrative difficulties, deterring smaller initiatives or firms from entering the DeFi industry. This could result in a reduction in innovation and a restricted range of services offered to users.

Furthermore, the ramifications of these allegations extend beyond the specific coins cited in the lawsuit. The uncertainty surrounding the regulatory status of various tokens within the DeFi ecosystem has the potential to exert a ripple effect on the sector as a whole. Market participants may display reluctance to participate with tokens that could potentially be classified as securities, weakening investor confidence and limiting overall market growth.

Unlevel playing field

The charges against Binance and Coinbase by the SEC can be perceived as giving traditional banking institutions an unfair advantage over DeFi. The financial crisis of 2008 uncovered several examples of fraudulent operations, risky behavior and bad management within the traditional banking sector. Despite their role in contributing to the crisis, many banks got government bailouts to prevent their collapse. This liberal approach allowed them to continue functioning without suffering significant consequences for their actions.

In contrast, the crypto exchanges, such as Binance and Coinbase, are now being sued for alleged violations of securities laws and operating unregistered exchanges. This gap in treatment raises concerns about justice and equal opportunity. It seems that traditional financial institutions are offered second chances and support, but crypto exchanges are instantly subjected to legal action and regulatory crackdowns.

Related: Binance was wrong to boot Monero, ZCash and other privacy coins

Such a difference not only contradicts the concepts of fairness and accountability but also limits the growth and development of the growing crypto economy. Moreover, this biased approach risks producing an unlevel playing field. Traditional financial organizations are subject to well-established rules and have the capacity to negotiate difficult compliance obligations, while crypto exchanges may struggle to satisfy these stringent criteria.

This discrepancy in resources and regulatory load puts crypto exchanges at a disadvantage, hampering their capacity to compete and innovate. This mismatch in regulatory treatment may hamper the fair playing field for DeFi ventures, limiting their ability to compete and develop against established financial firms.

Brain drain and talent migration

The availability of resources and financing frequently drives talent mobility. Countries or locations that have a robust investor community, well-established fundraising networks, and access to finance tend to attract top talent. These tools provide the necessary support for entrepreneurs and innovators to bring their ideas to fruition. Lack of financing and resources in certain places can encourage talent to relocate to areas where they have better access to these critical aspects.

Heightened regulatory measures against DeFi exchanges can lead to a skill drain within the ecosystem. Skilled professionals and entrepreneurs may choose to quit the DeFi industry or relocate to jurisdictions with more favorable regulatory conditions. This brain drain can deprive the DeFi business of valuable experience and limit the development of creative solutions.

For example, China’s crackdown on cryptocurrency and ICO-related activities in 2017 led to the movement of talent and crypto-related enterprises to more crypto-friendly jurisdictions like Singapore, Switzerland, and Malta. This move led to these countries attracting considerable blockchain and DeFi innovation.

Disincentive for institutional adoption

Regulatory measures against Binance and Coinbase can create a deterrent for institutional investors to join the DeFi ecosystem. Institutions typically seek regulatory clarity and compliance while selecting investments. Uncertainty and regulatory scrutiny surrounding DeFi exchanges may dissuade institutional investors from entering the market, reducing the inflow of institutional money that can contribute to the growth and maturation of DeFi.

For example, the SEC’s reluctance to approve a Bitcoin exchange-traded fund in the United States due to worries over market manipulation and a lack of regulatory control has caused many institutional investors to be wary about entering the cryptosphere. Furthermore, the SEC’s rejection was correlated with major declines in Bitcoin’s price, demonstrating that negative regulatory developments can impact price volatility and thereby damage investor confidence.

Ultimately, the outcome of these allegations and regulatory measures will influence the destiny of DeFi. It is vital for regulators to assess the potential of disruptive technologies and ensure that their actions do not hinder their growth or deter innovation. Striking the right balance between regulation and decentralization is important to unlock the full potential of DeFi and usher in a new era of financial inclusiveness and empowerment.

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.