BlackRock desafia distinção da SEC para futuros de criptografia e ETFs à vista
- A BlackRock disse que a SEC não tem justificativa lógica para diferenciar entre ETFs à vista e futuros de BTC.
- A SEC afirma que os ETFs de futuros de criptografia têm regulamentação superior e proteção ao consumidor sob a Lei de 1940.
- The 1940 Act lacks relevance in this area, as it places “certain restrictions on ETFs and ETF sponsors,” it said.
- BlackRock filed for an Ether spot ETF called the “iShares Ethereum Trust” on November 9.
BlackRock, the world’s largest asset management firm with around $9.4 trillion in assets under management, has stated that the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has no grounds to differentiate between Bitcoin spot exchange-traded fund (ETF) and BTC futures ETFs. The regulator has no valid reason for the rejection of spot ETF applications, the firm said.
A principal empresa de gestão de activos apresentou o seu plano para uma ETF spot-Ether (ETH) called the “iShares Ethereum Trust” on November 9, resulting in a surge in the price of ETH. Nasdaq submitted the 19b-4 application form to the SEC on behalf of BlackRock, and in its aplicativo, the firm questioned the regulator’s treatment of Bitcoin spot ETFs.
A BlackRock afirma que a SEC usou uma lógica infundada para traçar uma linha entre ETFs à vista de Bitcoin e ETFs de futuros de Bitcoin, aprovando os últimos e rejeitando múltiplas aplicações dos primeiros.
“Given that the Commission has approved ETFs that offer exposure to ETH futures, which themselves are priced based on the underlying spot ETH market, the Sponsor believes that the Commission must also approve ETPs that offer exposure to spot ETH,” said the asset management firm.
É importante observar que a SEC não aprovou um único ETF à vista de Bitcoin, apesar de receber uma dúzia de solicitações para o mesmo das principais empresas de gestão de ativos. No entanto, a agência aprovou ETFs futuros de Bitcoin, alegando que eles têm regulamentação superior e proteções ao consumidor sob a Lei de 1940, em oposição à Lei de 1933, que cobre ETFs criptográficos à vista.
Further, it seems that the SEC also favors regulation and surveillance-sharing agreements over the Chicago Mercantile Exchange’s (CME’s) digital asset futures market. Interestingly, BlackRock claims that the SEC’s preference for the 1940 Act lacks relevance in this area, as it places “certain restrictions on ETFs and ETF sponsors” and not the underlying assets of the ETFs.
The regulator said that “none of these restrictions address an ETF’s underlying assets, whether ETH futures or spot ETH, or the markets from which such assets’ pricing is derived, whether the CME ETH futures market or spot ETH markets,” while adding:
“As a result, the Sponsor believes that the distinction between registration of ETH futures ETFs under the 1940 Act and the registration of spot ETH ETPs under the 1933 Act is one without a difference in the context of ETH-based ETP proposals.”
BlackRock also noted that by approving Bitcoin futures ETFs via CME, the SEC “clearly determined that CME surveillance can detect spot-market fraud that would affect spot ETPs.”
Conforme relatado anteriormente pela Bitnation, o CEO da BlackRock, Larry Fink, revelou que a empresa de gestão de ativos havia investiu $24 milhões na agora falida exchange de criptomoedas FTX.
Jornalista cripto com mais de 3 anos de experiência em DeFi, NFT, metaverso, etc. Parth trabalhou com grandes meios de comunicação no mundo cripto e financeiro e ganhou experiência e conhecimento em cultura criptográfica depois de sobreviver a mercados de baixa e alta ao longo dos anos.
