To protect the interests of investors in the United States, the crypto advocacy group Chamber of Digital Commerce urged the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, to approve applications for Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs).
The Chamber of Digital Commerce claimed in research released on Monday titled “The Crypto Conundrum” that the U.S. has lagged behind other nations where citizens have access to cryptocurrency investment products like Bitcoin ETFs.
The crypto advocacy group went on to say that there had been “no reported instances of hacking or theft and no indications of market manipulation” about Bitcoin ETFs that had been made available internationally, arguing that the SEC’s earlier denial of applications was “misguided and counterproductive.”
The Chamber of Digital Commerce — naming Canada, Germany, Sweden, Switzerland, and Australia said,
“As the SEC continues to stonewall, the United States continues to fall further behind other countries as capital that would have been invested in the United States, which would be managed by U.S. firms employing U.S. persons, is instead deployed in other, more innovation-friendly countries.”
Need for Bitcoin ETF?
A fund that enables investors to trade Bitcoin easily is now available, long seen as a big step toward accessibility for an industry whose assets are still mainly seen as being too opaque and volatile for the average individual.
Such ETFs would include tokens in the same types of packaged funds that have long let investors test out highly specialized market areas, various bond types, or broad stock indices without having to secure their capital or pay management fees.
In response to the SEC’s denial of a Bitcoin ETF, the crypto advocacy group argued that the agency had violated its duty to protect investors by encouraging investors to “acquire their exposure [to crypto] in a less regulated and/or foreign environment where they are much more susceptible to unscrupulous actors and the risks of self-custody.”
They further stated,
“The SEC has now positioned itself as a merit regulator on this matter. It has been determined that the American public cannot yet handle the responsibility of familiar, cost-effective, liquid, transparent, and regulated access to the Bitcoin markets. Unfortunately, the cost of this position has fallen, and will continue to fall, on U.S. investors and the U.S. capital markets.”
According to the research by the Digital Chamber, the SEC’s stance is inconsistent with its prior practices and has remained unchanged even as the industry tried to address agency complaints.
Well, the SEC did accept a Teucrium futures ETF that was filed under the same law that the spot ETF applications relied on earlier this year, which has added to the irritation of those looking for the spot funds. However, SEC Chair Gary Gensler has claimed that because the statute includes specific consumer protections, he is okay with futures ETFs.
Even yet, the regulator, which is getting ready to defend its position in court, is unlikely to be persuaded by this week’s findings.
Around 16 different applicants had their petitions to establish spot-market versions—funds that own Bitcoin—rejected despite the industry getting approval for Bitcoin futures ETFs. The agency has repeatedly expressed concern about possible market manipulation.
