Binance Square
LIVE
LIVE
Abbas Trader
--121 views
SEC wins case against YouTuber Ian Balina for unregistered crypto ICO promo A U.S. federal judge sided with the SEC, finding that Ian Balina broke securities laws by participating in a 2018 crypto token ICO. Crypto YouTuber Ian Balina sold unregistered securities when he bought Sparkster (SPRK) tokens and offered them to United States investors in an investment pool, a Texas federal court judge has ruled. “The Court has determined, as a matter of law, that U.S. securities laws are applicable to Balina’s actions and that SPRK tokens qualify as securities,” Judge David Alan Ezra wrote in a May 22 order, granting a partial victory to the Securities and Exchange Commission, which filed the lawsuit in 2022. The court found SPRK was an investment contract under the securities-determining Howey test — where investors pool money into a common enterprise expecting profits due to the efforts of others. Judge Ezra agreed with the SEC that Balina “purposefully targeted United States investors” and knocked back the influencer’s summary judgment bid, claiming the SEC had no sway as the sales happened overseas. $BTC $ETH #ETHETFsApproved #BinanceLaunchpool

SEC wins case against YouTuber Ian Balina for unregistered crypto ICO promo

A U.S. federal judge sided with the SEC, finding that Ian Balina broke securities laws by participating in a 2018 crypto token ICO.

Crypto YouTuber Ian Balina sold unregistered securities when he bought Sparkster (SPRK) tokens and offered them to United States investors in an investment pool, a Texas federal court judge has ruled.

“The Court has determined, as a matter of law, that U.S. securities laws are applicable to Balina’s actions and that SPRK tokens qualify as securities,” Judge David Alan Ezra wrote in a May 22 order, granting a partial victory to the Securities and Exchange Commission, which filed the lawsuit in 2022.

The court found SPRK was an investment contract under the securities-determining Howey test — where investors pool money into a common enterprise expecting profits due to the efforts of others.

Judge Ezra agreed with the SEC that Balina “purposefully targeted United States investors” and knocked back the influencer’s summary judgment bid, claiming the SEC had no sway as the sales happened overseas.

$BTC $ETH #ETHETFsApproved #BinanceLaunchpool

Αποποίηση ευθυνών: Περιλαμβάνει γνώμες τρίτων. Δεν είναι οικονομική συμβουλή. Ενδέχεται να περιλαμβάνει χορηγούμενο περιεχόμενο. Δείτε τους Όρους και προϋποθέσεις.
0
Εξερευνήστε τα τελευταία νέα για τα κρύπτο
⚡️ Συμμετέχετε στις πιο πρόσφατες συζητήσεις για τα κρύπτο
💬 Αλληλεπιδράστε με τους αγαπημένους σας δημιουργούς
👍 Απολαύστε περιεχόμενο που σας ενδιαφέρει
Διεύθυνση email/αριθμός τηλεφώνου
Σχετικός δημιουργός
LIVE
@AbbasT-rader

Ανακαλύψτε περισσότερα από τον Δημιουργό

--
$ETH Polymarket gets backlash over ‘approved’ outcome on $13M Ethereum ETF bet A multi-million bet on “Ethereum ETF approved by May 31” resolved to a “Yes” on Polymarket as news from the SEC broke, but the losing side argues it's not over yet. Polymarket users who lost money by betting against the approval of spot Ether ETH tickers down $3,701 exchange-traded funds (ETFs) are crying foul toward the decentralized betting platform, arguing the bet is still on. One betting market on the blockchain platform saw over $13.2 million worth of bets placed on whether an Ether ETF would be approved by May 31 — but it didn’t exactly detail what “approved” meant. The market closed at a “Yes” result on May 23, after the Securities and Exchange Commission greenlit the 19b-4 filings for multiple Ether ETFs. Polymarket's logs show the result was briefly disputed but ultimately resolved with the same “Yes" outcome. But “No” voters argue the call is incorrect, saying a United States ETF needs an approved 19b-4 filing and Form S-1 to start trading on an exchange, and without the S-1 filing, there can’t be a “Yes” result. Analysts say it could be months before the SEC approves the S-1s, which some “No” voters may have banked their money on. Prominent “No” bidder “JustKen” — who changed their name to “RevengeTour19B4” after the saga — pointed to VanEck digital assets research head Matthew Sigel’s X post that said “ETFs are not considered ‘approved’” until both the S-1 and “19b-4 filing have been signed off on by the SEC. #TrendingBinance #ETHETFsApproved #EthereumETFApprovalExpectations #BTC
--

Τελευταία νέα

Προβολή περισσότερων
Χάρτης τοποθεσίας
Cookie Preferences
Όροι και Προϋπ. της πλατφόρμας