More than a third of millennials and half of Generation Z would be happy to receive 50% of their salary in cryptocurrencies, revealed a study.

Srdjanpav | E+ | Getty Images

With more than $1 trillion in cryptocurrency value wiped out since the 2021 high-water mark, many investors may be tempted to enter the cryptocurrency orbit at a potentially attractive, lower price point.

After all, previous dramatic drawdowns in cryptocurrency valuations have been followed by explosive growth and all this volatility could be justified as the expectedly bumpy price discovery process of an important brand-new asset class.

However, the most profound risks to cryptocurrency investing may lie ahead, rather than in the rear-view mirror. Investors contemplating a long-term allocation to cryptocurrencies should remain wary for five primary reasons.

After a dazzling first decade, bitcoin has become a somewhat troubled teenager. In its heady early days, bitcoin had near-zero correlation with broad equities and commodities, providing the potential for true portfolio diversification.

However, as cryptocurrency investing has become more mainstream, and especially since 2020, bitcoin's correlation with U.S. equities and bonds has spiked sharply and remained consistently positive.

That might be fine if bitcoin offered spectacular risk-adjusted returns as compensation. Unfortunately, recent empirical evidence shows otherwise: Since 2018, bitcoin's risk-adjusted return has been quite unremarkable compared to equities and bonds.

Despite all the hype as digital gold, cryptocurrencies have failed to demonstrate either "safe haven" or inflation-fighting properties when faced with actual market volatility or the first real bout of serious inflation in developed markets.

Between 2010 and 2022, bitcoin recorded 27 episodes of drawdowns of 25% or more. By comparison, equities and commodities recorded just one each. Even in the pandemic-related market selloff of March 2020, bitcoin suffered significantly deeper drawdowns than conventional asset classes like equities or bonds.

More from Personal Finance:This former financial advisor pivoted to teach advisors about crypto80% of socially responsible ESG investors also own cryptocurrencySome experts say a recession is coming. Heres how to prepare your portfolio

Similarly, while the fixed supply of bitcoin hardcoded into its blockchain might imply a resistance to monetary debasement, in the recent episodes of elevated global inflation, bitcoin has provided limited inflation protection with prices tumbling even as inflation spikes in the U.S., U.K. and Europe.

Cryptocurrencies remain deeply problematic from an environmental, social and governance, or ESG, perspective. That's true even if the transition from proof-of-work to proof-of-stake that blockchain-based software platform ethereum is spearheading reduces the massive energy consumption underpinning crypto mining and validation.

Environmentally, bitcoin which represents more than 40% of current cryptocurrency market cap will continue to use a validation process where a single transaction requires enough energy to power the average American home for two months.

Socially, cryptocurrencies' promise of financial inclusiveness also appears overblown, with crypto wealth as unequally distributed as conventional wealth, and with simple phone-based payment services such as M-Pesa in Kenya or Grameen Bank's international remittance pilots in Bangladesh already providing a digital platform for underbanked households without the need for a new currency or payment infrastructure.

Most troublingly for investors with ESG goals, however, are the governance issues with cryptocurrencies whose decentralized frameworks and anonymity make them especially attractive for illicit activity, money laundering and sanction evasion.

The increased trading between ruble and cryptocurrencies following sanctions on Russia after the Ukraine war suggest that the evasion of financial sanctions is not just a theoretical concern. Market manipulation is another area of governance concern, especially with celebrity crypto influencers who can send market prices soaring or tumbling with impunity.

Even putting aside the recent implosion of the Terra stablecoin, the surviving universe of stablecoins face a potentially existential risk: They could well be made redundant once central bank digital currencies, also called CBDCs, become commonplace. This is because a digital dollar, euro or sterling would provide all the functionality of stablecoins but with almost no liquidity or credit risk.

In other words, even if stablecoins transformed from their current status as unregulated money market funds (with limited transparency into or auditing of reserves) into regulated digital tokens, they would afford no benefit over CBDCs. Importantly, these central bank digital currencies may not a distant prospect. China has already launched an electronic currency known as the digital yuan, or e-CNY.

The Fed released a long-awaited study on a digital dollar at the start of 2022, and the ECB will share its findings on the viability of a digital euro in 2023.

Finally, a lack of clear and uniform cryptocurrency regulation both within and across countries creates tremendous uncertainty for long-term investors. It is still unclear in the U.S., for example, when a cryptocurrency falls under the regulatory framework of a security subject to Securities and Exchange Commission regulations and when it is deemed to be an asset or commodity like bitcoin and ether have claimed.

Indeed, in some countries, cryptocurrencies are facing outright prohibition. China's abrupt banning of all cryptocurrency trading and mining in 2021 is a prominent example, but by no means the only one. Regulators have also been concerned with the notable and repeated breakdowns in the infrastructure supporting cryptocurrency mining and trading another area where there remains significant regulatory uncertainty.

Of course, momentum, retail speculation, and the "fear of missing out" may continue to drive up the short-term price of bitcoin, ether and other cryptocurrencies. But there are enough dark clouds on the cryptocurrency horizon that long-term investors may want to observe carefully from the sidelines to better understand fact vs. fiction and true value versus social media hype before deciding how, where and if to invest in the crypto ecosystem.

By Taimur Hyat, chief operating officer of PGIM.

Read the rest here:
Op-ed: The toughest challenges for cryptocurrency lie ahead, not in the rear-view mirror - CNBC

Russian President Vladimir Putin today signed a bill that prohibits using digital assets in the country, including cryptocurrency and nonfungible tokens, to pay for goods and services.

The law, coming nearly seven months after Russias central bank called for a ban on using and mining cryptocurrencies, does not ban possession of cryptocurrency and digital assets, rather it restricts how theyre used. It is forbidden to transfer or accept digital financial assets as a counter-provision for the transferred goods, work performed, services provided, as well as another method that allows assuming payment by the digital financial asset of goods (works, services), except in cases provided for by federal laws, the law states.

The call for a ban in January was argued on the basis that digital assets pose a threat to the countrys financial stability and peoples well-being.The breakneck growth and market value of cryptocurrency are defined primarily by speculative demand for future growth, which creates bubbles, the central bank said at the time. Cryptocurrencies also have aspects of financial pyramids because their price growth is largely supported by demand from new entrants to the market.

Its not clear exactly how many people in Russia will be affected by the new ban. It doesnt mention cryptocurrency mining, meaning that the law shouldnt impact Russias mining community, the third-largest in the world as of April. The law also doesnt ban possession or direct trading of cryptocurrencies, meaning there will be little impact for most in Russia.

Russia has a strange history with cryptocurrencies,at times lookingto ban them, then seemingly looking tolegalize them. In 2018, as Russian banks were planning cryptocurrency pilots, others in Russia were rallying against them.

Forward to Russias invasion of Ukraine in February, and attempts were made to have cryptocurrency exchanges suspend accounts belonging to Russian nationals, a request refused by leading exchanges. In April, the U.S. Treasury Department sanctioned Russian-owned cryptocurrency mining company Bitriver AG as part of a crackdown on companies and individuals avoiding sanctions on Russia.

Follow this link:
Russia bans use of cryptocurrency and NFTs to pay for goods and services - SiliconANGLE News

Getty Images

The amount of cryptocurrency flowing into privacy-enhancing mixer services has reached an all-time high this year as funds from wallets belonging to government-sanctioned groups and criminal activity almost doubled, researchers reported on Thursday.

Mixers, also known as tumblers, obfuscate cryptocurrency transactions by creating a disconnect between the funds a user deposits and the funds the user withdraws. To do this, mixers pool funds deposited by large numbers of users and randomly mix them. Each user can withdraw the entire amount deposited, minus a cut for the mixer, but because the coins come from this jumbled pool, it's harder for blockchain investigators to track precisely where the money went.

Some mixers provide additional obfuscation by allowing users to withdraw funds in differing amounts sent to different wallet addresses. Others try to conceal the mixing activity altogether by changing the fee on each transaction or varying the type of deposit address used.

Mixer use isn't automatically illegal or unethical. Given how easy it is to track the flow of Bitcoin and some other types of cryptocurrency, there are legitimate privacy reasons anyone might want to use one. But given the rampant use of cryptocurrency in online crime, mixers have evolved as a must-use tool for criminals who want to cash out without being caught by authorities.

"Mixers present a difficult question to regulators and members of the cryptocurrency community," researchers from cryptocurrency analysis firm Chainalysis wrote in a report that linked the surge to increased volumes deposited by sanctioned and criminal groups. "Virtually everyone would acknowledge that financial privacy is valuable, and that in a vacuum, there's no reason services like mixers shouldn't be able to provide it. However, the data shows that mixers currently pose a significant money laundering risk, with 25 percent of funds coming from illicit addresses, and that cybercriminals associated with hostile governments are taking advantage."

The report added: "Mixers may soon become obsolete as Chainalysis continues to refine the ability to demix certain mixing transactions and see users original source of funds. But for the time being, our data shows that mixers are receiving more cryptocurrency than ever in 2022."

Cryptocurrency received by these mixers fluctuates significantly from day to day, so researchers find it more useful to use longer-term measures. The 30-day moving average of funds received by mixers hit $51.8 million in mid-April, an all-time high, Chainalysis reported. The high-water mark represented almost double the incoming volumes at the same point last year. What's more, illicit wallet addresses accounted for 23 percent of funds sent to mixers this year, up from 12 percent in 2021.

As the graph below illustrates, the increases come most notably from higher volumes sent from addresses connected to illicit activity, such as ransomware attacks, cryptocurrency scams, and stolen funds carried out by groups sanctioned by the US government. To a lesser extent, volumes sent from centralized exchanges, DeFi, or decentralized finance protocols, also drove the surge.

Chainalysis

A breakdown of volumes connected to illicit sources shows that the spike is driven primarily by sanctioned entitiesmainly Russian and North Korean in originfollowed by cryptocurrency thieves and fraudsters pushing cryptocurrency investment scams.

Chainalysis

The sanctioned entities are led by Hydra, a Russia-based dark web market that serves as a haven for criminals to buy and sell services and products to one another. In April, the US Department of Treasury sanctioned Hydra to stymie the group's efforts to liquidate their ill-gotten proceeds. The remaining volume from sanctioned groups came from the North Korean hacking group Lazarus and the Blender.io tumbler, which the US Treasury Department sanctioned earlier this year for serving the North Korean government.

Chainalysis

Despite their utility, mixers suffer a critical Achilles' heel: Large transactions make them ineffective, meaning that they work less efficiently when people use them to deposit large amounts of cryptocurrency.

"Since users are receiving a 'mix' of funds contributed by others, if one user floods the mixer and contributes significantly more than others, much of what they end up with will be made up of the funds they originally put in, making it possible to trace the funds back to their original source," Thursday's report explained. "In other words, mixers function best when they have a large number of users, all of whom are mixing comparable amounts of cryptocurrency."

Post updated to correct description of Blender.io.

Here is the original post:
Cryptocurrency flowing into mixers hits an all-time high. Wanna guess why? - Ars Technica

A Goldman legend, crypto star and top banker warn of next big risk

In a year in which Russias invasion of Ukraine is sending shock waves through global politics and markets, inflation is soaring worldwide and supply chains areunraveling, the largest investors are assessing the long-term consequences of the events they didnt see coming. We asked three market visionaries about the next big risk in the coming five to 10 years: Abby Joseph Cohen, the former Goldman Sachs Group Inc. strategist known for bold market calls who now teaches at Columbia University; FTX Chief Executive Officer Sam Bankman-Fried, whos boosting his charitable and political giving while his cryptocurrency exchange is becoming a lender of last resort in his industry; and Ken Moelis, the billionaire whose investment bank advises some of the worlds largest companies.Read More

View original post here:
Top Cryptocurrency News on July 18: Bitcoin over Rs 17 lakh, crypto star warns of next big risk, NFT buzz,... - Moneycontrol

Whether you bought in early or got in recently, the crypto market has been an extremely volatile area for investors. Values can rise or fall 95% or more in a matter of days, and there seems to be no warning as to when big moves are coming.

Does this volatility mean cryptocurrency doesn't belong in millennials' portfolios? I think there is a place, but if you have a clear investment thesis with diversified assets cryptocurrency can be a good investment for young investors.

The first question to answer is why you are investing in cryptocurrencies at all. Some investors think cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin (BTC 1.11%) are digital gold, while others think crypto is a digital currency or utility for developments like smart contracts, the metaverse, or digital goods. Understanding your investment thesis will guide where your focus should be.

Like buying a stock, understanding your investment thesis can make or break a crypto investment. If the thesis is simply that a token will go up, based on technical analysis alone with no fundamental reason, the thesis will quickly fall apart -- much like a stock with a weak underlying company.

Millennials with a long-term time horizon should look for investment opportunities where disruptive technology is being built -- just like the internet was a disruptive technology in the 1990s, despite the fact that the idea of building an internet business seemed crazy at the time. I think of many cryptocurrency projects as an ecosystem and their cryptocurrencies as the "currency" of that ecosystem.

Blockchain technology allows for new innovations in technology. That's why I've kept my focus on Ethereum (ETH 4.27%) and Solana (SOL 2.31%), and I've placed most of my crypto exposure with NFTs.

These utility blockchains with smart contracts (led by Ethereum and Solana) allow information to be stored on the blockchain and then developers can build tools and businesses around that data. It could be a metaverse project where a digital asset notes ownership of land or an NFT that gives membership to a club (like Bored Ape Yacht Club).

These tokens are often called utility tokens and there are dozens that serve different purposes in Web3. Having exposure to cryptocurrencies that are building a larger ecosystem with real-world or digital world businesses is where real value will be found.

If you've been following crypto markets over the last few months you know that volatility is commonplace. It's not uncommon for values to rise or fall 10% or more in a day and some cryptocurrencies can go to zero overnight.

Diversification will take some risk from your portfolio, but doing due diligence on how cryptocurrencies are run and where there's risk is critical. Not all cryptocurrencies will survive the next few years and acknowledging that risk is important as an investor.

It may sound counterintuitive, but I think the same Foolish mindset that works in stocks will work in cryptocurrencies. Investing in projects you believe in and founders that have a long-term vision of how to build value is where money will be made.

And like the stock market, a level of diversification is needed because we never know when unanticipated risks will cause a cryptocurrency to drop to zero.

It's likely to be a bumpy ride, but given the disruption potential from crypto and the blockchain, I think millennial investors with a multi-decade time horizon should have at least some crypto exposure. If that exposure is diversified and in projects that are growing and attracting users, the upside is still very high.

Travis Hoium has positions in Ethereum and Solana. The Motley Fool has positions in and recommends Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana. The Motley Fool has a disclosure policy.

Read the original here:
Should Millennials Be Investing in Cryptocurrency? - The Motley Fool

On July 5, 2022, cryptocurrency brokerage Voyager Digital filedfor chapter 11 in the Southern District of New York BankruptcyCourt, citing a short-term "run on the bank" due to the"crypto winter" in the cryptocurrency industry generallyand the default of a significant loan made to a third party as thereasons for its filing. At Voyager's first day hearing on July8, 2022, the Bankruptcy Court asked the critical question ofwhether the crypto assets on Voyager's platform were propertyof the estate or its customers. Voyager asserted the crypto assetswere assets of the estate pursuant to the terms of its customeragreements, but the question of ownership was more problematic inthe context of a liquidation. In that context, Voyager's planof reorganization proposes to resolve any mystery of ownership bydelivering the reorganized company to its customers.

On July 13, 2022, cryptocurrency lender Celsius Network filedfor chapter 11 in the Southern District of New York BankruptcyCourt. Celsius had frozen customer withdrawals on June 12, 2022and, at the time of its chapter 11 filing, indicated that it wouldnot be requesting court authority to allow customer withdrawals.Celsius noted in a press release that customer claims would beaddressed through the chapter 11 process.

Voyager's and Celsius' chapter 11 bankruptcy filingshighlight the question of whether crypto assets held by anexchange, or similar platform, may be considered property of abankruptcy estate and, therefore, not recoverable by the customer,who would then likely be an unsecured claimholder of thedebtor.

While some commentators have suggested that crypto assets mightbe considered property of the exchange's bankruptcy estate,existing common law, existing provisions of Uniform Commercial Code(UCC) Article 8, and proposed amendments to the UCC recognize thatif the arrangement and relationship between the exchange and itscustomers is one that is characterized as "custodial,"the crypto assets held by the exchange should remain property ofthe customer and, hence, not subject to dilution by generalunsecured claimholders.

The common law. When assets are heldby a "custodian" for the benefit of the customers of thecustodian, the assets are owned by the customer and would not formpart of the debtor's bankruptcy estate. The United States Courtof Appeals for the Seventh Circuit determined in In reJoliet-Will County Community Action Agency1 thatproperty held by the debtor as a custodian or other intermediarywho then generally lacks beneficial ownership rights is not anasset of the bankruptcy estate.

The court then looked to see if the relationship between thedebtor and those who transferred funds to the debtor was in fact"custodial." The court concluded the answer depends on"the terms under which the grants were made" and the"relationship" between the holder of the funds and itscustomer. In Joliet-Will, the agreement provided forcontrols on the holder's use of the funds and the holder was"in effect an agent to carry out specified tasks rather than aborrower, or an entrepreneur using invested funds." The courtconcluded the relationship was "custodial" and, thus, thefunds were not property of the bankruptcy estate.

In the context of a cryptocurrency exchange bankruptcy, the sameanalysis should apply where the terms of the relationship betweenan exchange and its customer are comparable and, thus,"custodial". In that case, the customer would have abasis to assert that it should remain the beneficial owner of theassets, rather than become a general unsecured claimholder of theexchange.

The commingling of customer assets, or the contractual right ofan exchange in possession or control of the customer's assetsto grant a security interest in that property do not, ofthemselves, prevent the assets from remaining the property of thecustomer.2

Conversely, if the entity in possession or control of theproperty has extensive rights to use the property for its ownbenefit, a court is more likely to conclude that the relationshipis not "custodial." In that case, the customer"would have a contractual claim for the return of the money[it] had paid, but he would not have a property right in themoney."3

However, even if a court was to determine the customer shouldremain the beneficial owner of assets held by a custodianin such capacity, notwithstanding any commingling and any right topledge the cryptocurrency, any contractual rights of thecustodian (for example, any rights under a staking arrangement)should become property of the estate. In such a case, while thecustomer remains the beneficial owner of its cryptocurrency, whichwould not be subject to distribution to general unsecuredclaimholders in the exchange's bankruptcy, it could be tied upunder the automatic stay preventing parties from exercising controlover the exchange's contractual rights (e.g., under astaking arrangement, the automatic stay might prevent a customerfrom recalling the cryptocurrency to its account).

Article 8 of the Uniform CommercialCode. Article 8 mirrors these rules for financialassets held by a securities intermediary. Under Article 8, asecurities intermediary4 includes a"custodian" of a "financial asset"5who otherwise meets the definition of a securitiesintermediary.6 Critically, existing language in Section8-503(a) of the UCC outlines the ownership interest of a customerwhose cryptocurrency is held by an intermediary such as anexchange, if the exchange is a "securities intermediary,"has agreed with the customer to treat the cryptocurrency as a"financial asset,"7 and has credited thefinancial asset to a securities account.8 This is trueunder Article 8 even though the securities intermediary holds thefinancial assets in "fungible" form (i.e., theyare commingled).9 Article 8 in effect codifies thecommon law custodian rules for transactions within the scope ofArticle 8the customer of the custodian retains its propertyinterest and has a pro rata interest in the commingled assets heldby the custodian.

Proposed Amendments to the Uniform CommercialCode. Pending amendments to the UCC further implementthe rule that custodially held crypto assets should not be propertyof the bankruptcy estate in a bankruptcy of acustodian-cryptocurrency exchange. The drafting of amendments tothe UCC specifically to address certain cryptocurrencies and otherdigital assets is nearing completion and is expected to go to theStates for consideration in the Fall of 2022. Under theseamendments, cryptocurrencies would fit into a new category ofcollateral under the UCC, referred to as "controllableelectronic records" (a form of general intangible) (CERs),which would generally include information stored in a nontangiblemedium that can be subjected to control. Under these amendments,CERs will have many characteristics of negotiability similar tonegotiable instruments and securities; however, cryptocurrenciesordinarily will not be considered "money" for purposes ofthe UCC (that is, the amendment generally provides thatcryptocurrencies generally are not considered "money,"but a cryptocurrency created and adopted by a government as anauthorized medium of exchange could be "money" under theUCC).

Notably, the proposed amendments to the official comments toArticle 8 of the UCC primarily serve to make clear that asecurities intermediary and a customer of a securities intermediarycan agree to treat a cryptocurrency as a "financialasset" and credit it to a securities account with thetreatment described above.

The proposed amendments to the official comments in Section8-501(d) note that assets such as CERs might also be controlled bya securities intermediary outside of a securities account for thebenefit of a customersimilar to traditional securities, inwhich case the bankruptcy of the intermediary often times would notput in doubt the customer's ownership of securities in in thatcircumstance held by the intermediary:

[A]ssets such as controllable electronic records, controllableaccounts, and controllable payment intangibles also might beassociated with an intermediary as well as with its customer undera similar direct holding arrangement. . . . As with conventionalcertificated securities, whether an intermediary has created asecurity entitlement in favor of an entitlement holder or isholding a financial asset directly for a customer depends on thenature of the relationship and the nature of the rights of theintermediary and the customer with respect to the financialasset.

In addition, revisions to Article 9 of the UCC will provide thata security interest in a CER can be perfected the old fashionedwayby filing a financing statementor by obtaining"control" of the CER. Under current distributed ledgertechnology structures such as blockchain, a secured party normallywould normally obtain "control" of a cryptocurrency thatis a CER if the secured party has the private key. A secured partycan have control through a custodian that has control for thebenefit of a secured party. Where a securities intermediary and acustomer of a securities intermediary agree to treat acryptocurrency as a "financial asset"10 andcredit it to a securities account, the customer would have"security entitlement" related to the cryptocurrency, andthe secured party could obtain and perfect a security interest insuch security entitlement under existing procedures under Articles8 and 9 of the UCC.

A new Article 12 to the UCC is being proposed that includesprovisions addressing transactions in cryptocurrencies fallingunder the category of a CER, such as sales of the cryptocurrency.In these transactions, a buyer of a CER can take free of theproperty claims of others if the buyer obtains control of the CER(e.g., holding the private key), gives value, and does nothave notice of the property claims of others.

While the proposed amendments to the UCC have yet to befinalized and adopted by the States, many of the amendments to theUCC as they relate to the ownership interest of a cryptocurrencyexchange customer in custodially held cryptocurrency are proposedas amendments to the official comments, without revision to theoperative statutory provisions themselves because the existingstatutory provisions already provide for the described results.Thus, a bankruptcy court could rely on the existing state UCCstatute as a basis to determine that when cryptocurrency is held asa financial asset credited to customer accounts, the cryptocurrencyis property of the customer, rather than bankruptcy estate. This isthe same result outside of Article 8 as discussed above.

Crypto assets held custodially by an exchange or other entityfor a customer should be treated as the property of the customer.The analysis of when a "custodial" relationship existswill depend on the agreements and other facts in a particularrelationship.

Footnotes

1. See In re Joliet-Will Cnty. CommunityAction Agency, 847 F.2d 430, 431 (7th Cir. 1988) (Posner, J)("Did they constitute JolietWill a trustee,custodian, or other intermediary, who lacks beneficialtitle and is merely an agent for the disbursal of funds belongingto another? If so, the funds (and the personal property bought withthem, cf. In re Kaiser, 791 F.2d 73, 77 (7th Cir.1986)) were notassets of the bankrupt estate." (Emphasis added)).

2. See also Restatement (Third) of Restitutionand Unjust Enrichment 59 (property interest in assetcontinues in commingled assets when the interests can be traced).See also Illustration 26 (400 customers of smelter deliversilver to smelter, who keeps records of the amount of silverdelivered by each customer, refines the silver for a fee, andagrees to return a corresponding amount of silver to each customer;when smelter fails, each customer has a pro rata property interestin the refined silver, which is not the property of smelter); UCC 9-207(c)(3).

3. Joliet-Will, 847 F.2d at432.

4. "Securities intermediary" is defined inSection 8-102(a)(14) of the UCC.

5. "Financial asset" is defined in Section8-102(a)(9) of the UCC.

6. UCC 8-102(a)(14) and Comment 14.

7. See Section 8-102(a)(9)(iii) of theUCC.

8. Section 8-503(a) provides that "[t]o the extentnecessary for a securities intermediary to satisfy all securityentitlements with respect to a particular financial asset, allinterests in that financial asset held by the securitiesintermediary are held by the securities intermediary for theentitlement holders, are not property of the securitiesintermediary, and are not subject to claims of creditors of thesecurities intermediary, except as otherwise provided in Section8-511."

9. This rule is the same as the smelting exampledescribed above from the Restatement (Third) of Restitution andUnjust Enrichment.

10. A financial asset does not have to be a"security" (as defined in Article 8 of the UCC) to be afinancial asset. As long as the relationship between the securitiesintermediary and the customer creates a "securitiesaccount" (UCC 8-501, Comment 1), the securitiesintermediary and its customer (referred to as an "entitlementholder") can agree to have any asset treated as a"financial asset". UCC 8-102(a)(9)(iii).

The Other Side Of The Coin: Cryptocurrency AssetsIn Bankruptcy

The content of this article is intended to provide a generalguide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be soughtabout your specific circumstances.

Read more from the original source:
The Other Side Of The Coin: Cryptocurrency Assets In Bankruptcy - Fin Tech - United States - Mondaq

The Charity Commission has urged charity trustees to consider the risks of using cryptocurrency.

The commission told trustees that it was important to document their decision-making if they did decide to invest, or take donations, in cryptocurrency.

Sam Jackson, the commissions assistant director of policy, wrote in a blog this week: Trustees who do decide to dip their toes in the crypto water should document their decision-making carefully.

Remember that if problems arise, the commission might need to get involved, and well expect to see evidence that you fulfilled your legal duties and responsibilities and did not put your charitys assets including its reputation at undue risk.

Cryptocurrency, or crypto, is a digital currency designed for use as a medium of exchange that is not reliant on a centralised system, such as a bank or government, to maintain or uphold it.

Bitcoin became the first decentralised cryptocurrency when it was released in 2009. Cryptocurrencies use blockchain technology to secure and record transactions.

The commission stressed the importance of charities being able to identify donors, which it said can be tricky in the context of cryptoassets, as the blockchain relies on indeed in some ways is designed to guarantee anonymity and secrecy.

It said that trustees should take appropriate professional advice when considering investing in cryptocurrency, and encouraged trustees to read its publications on the core duties of trustees and its investment guidance.

The blog added: As things stand, we consider that trustees should think very carefully before investing in cryptocurrency, evaluating the benefits and risks as they would do with any important decision about their charity.

See the article here:
Charities warned to be cautious about using cryptocurrency - Third Sector

Mastercard has collaborated with Fasset, a crypto gateway provider, to develop digital solutions to help accelerate the promotion and adoption of cryptocurrency in Indonesia.

The collaboration aims to improve financial inclusion in Indonesia and provide new prospects for the local economy. According to Mastercard, the cooperation will boost community access to new technologies.

In June, Mastercard had expanded its network to non-fungible token (NFT) trades.

An official from Mastercard Indonesia has now said that the adoption of crypto assets in countries, such as Indonesia will have significant influence on the entire crypto ecosystem, and it would serve as an example to other countries seeking to progress and accelerate economic growth.

In other news, OpenSea, a non-fungible token (NFT) marketplace, has announced layoffs, blaming the prevailing crypto winter. During the present weak market scenario, numerous crypto asset businesses have disclosed similar layoffs. The cause for the layoffs, according to OpenSea CEO Devin Finzer, is an unprecedented mix of crypto winter and wider socioeconomic volatility.

By trading volume, OpenSea is the worlds largest NFT marketplace. The decrease in personnel indicates that the crypto industry is hurting, and platforms are struggling to stay afloat. According to INSIDER, crypto businesses have decreased their workforce by 1,700 people in June alone. Exchange titans, such as Kraken, FTX, and Binance have opted not to follow in the footsteps of other cryptocurrency corporations.

Crypto Prices

The price of Bitcoin in the cryptocurrency market rose by 0.02 per cent in the last 24 hours, and it was trading at $20,817.80 at 5:15 pm IST. According to Coinmarketcap.com, its dominance in the crypto market is currently at 42.56 per cent, down by 0.11 per cent in the last 24 hours.

Ethereum (ETH) was trading at $1,217.19, up by 0.06 per cent, while Binance Coin (BNB) was down by 0.20 per cent in the last 24 hours, and it was trading at $237.43. Solana (SOL) was down by 0.56 per cent to $37.82, while Cardano (ADA) was down by 0.44 per cent to $0.4374.

Meme Coins

Dogecoin was trading at $0.06333 at 5:15 pm IST, down by 0.20 per cent on Coinmarketcap.com. Its rival, Shiba Inu, was up by 0.68 per cent, and it was trading at $0.00001094. Samoyedcoin was up by 8.99 per cent, and it was trading at $0.008962, while Dogelon Mars was up by 5.80 per cent, and it was trading at $0.0000003141.

Overall Scenario

According to Coinmarketcap.com, the global crypto market cap was at $963.01 billion, an increase of 6.24 per cent in the last 24 hours, while the total crypto market volume was $90.34 billion, a decrease of 0.15 per cent.

Read the rest here:
Mastercard Ties Up With Fasset To Promote Cryptocurrency Adoption In Indonesia, Bitcoin Up - Outlook India