The second largest cryptocurrency,Ethereum, may be under the tight scrutiny of the SEC after it shifted to theProof-of-Stakemodel. Is ETH PoSsecurity?
The Securities and Exchange Commission is closely examining the cryptocurrency market. They are already fighting a legal battle against Ripple Labs, the company behindXRP.
The SEC alleges that the Ripple labs sold XRP tokens worth $1.3 Billions between 2013 and 2020 through illegitimate means because XRP wasn’t registered as a security, yet it was offered to investors globally. Thecurtains could soon fallon the Ripple Labs vs. SEC case, which could set a precedent for future instances in which the crypto’s status as security is being questioned. But before the XRP vs. SEC case can come to a conclusion, there are various speculation if ETH PoS is a security.
Is Ethereum the new target of the SEC?
The SEC Chairman Gary Gensler told reporters fromThe Wall Street Journalthat certain cryptocurrencies that allow staking facilities to their investors might pass theHowey test.
“From the coin’s perspective… that’s another indicia that under the Howey test, the investing public is anticipating profits based on the efforts of others,” Gensler told reporters after a congressional hearing. However, he didn’t name any cryptocurrency specifically.
The Howey test is a crucial criterion used by courts to decide whether an asset should be considered a securityunder US laws. Investment instruments such as stocks and bonds are classified as securities.
Sponsored
Sponsored
How is the Howey test applied to prove an asset, a security
According to The Securities Act of 1933, an investment contract should have three prongs. A contract should satisfy all three prongs. If an instrument does not meet even any one of the prongs, it cannot be considered security.
- An investment of money
- In a common enterprise
- With reasonable expectations of profits derived solely from the efforts of others
The prong one states, “An investment of money” The validators depositing their ETH in the smart contract to validate the transactions and keep the Ethereum blockchain secure is not necessarily “an investment of money.” They are putting ETH as collateral to participate in the PoS mechanism. They are not making a purchase or an investment.
However, this argument may be valid technically. Still, it cannot be considered a solid argument because the ETH deposited as collateral can be viewed as a “risk” and may fall under the investment criteria.
Does Ethereum satisfy the second prong?
Sponsored
Sponsored
Under the second prong, “In a common enterprise,” there are two tests of Commonality:
- Horizontal Commonality means the individual’s capitals are tied to each other by “pooling of funds.” It is combined by pro-rata distribution of profits. Some believe that staking ETH qualifies horizontal Commonality because the fund is staked in a “common” smart contract, which means “pooling of funds.” It is not pooling because no promoter or central authority has direct control over the staked ETH. The validators stake 32 ETH in a common smart contract, but the staked ETH remains distinct and bound to theirnode. Validators are incentivized to validate the transactions or slashed if they are involved in some malpractice. There is no impact on all the other validators based on the successful actions or failures of a single validator. Hence there is no pro-rata distribution of profits. Thus the Horizontal Commonality is irrelevant.
- Vertical Commonality: The vertical Commonality focuses on the relationship between the investor and the issuer/promoter. It is irrelevant in the case of Ethereum because there is no promoter. Ethereum is a decentralized and open-sourced project. Anyone can join the Ethereum network as a validator. They are rewarded or slashed based on their actions through the codes of smart contracts. The rewards they receive are not due to the efforts of any promoters or issuer.
Hence Ethereum fails to satisfy both the test of Commonality. Failure of even one of the prongs proves thatEthereum cannot be considered a security as per the Howey test.
Does Ethereum satisfy the third prong?
Sponsored
Sponsored
The third prong states, “With reasonable expectations of profits derived solely from the efforts of others.”
The staking reward in Ethereum is determined by the validator’s own efforts, as explained earlier. It does not “solely depend on efforts of others.” The validators are putting efforts into maximizing their up-time and remaining connected to the network.
Ethereum fails to satisfy, if not all, but 2 out of 3 prongs. Hence ETH PoS is not a security.
For Be[In]Crypto’s latest Bitcoin (BTC) analysis, click here
Sponsored
Sponsored
Top crypto platforms in the US | December 2023
Disclaimer
In adherence to the Trust Project guidelines, BeInCrypto is committed to unbiased, transparent reporting. This news article aims to provide accurate, timely information. However, readers are advised to verify facts independently and consult with a professional before making any decisions based on this content.
As a seasoned cryptocurrency expert with a comprehensive understanding of blockchain technology, decentralized finance, and regulatory landscapes, I can confidently dissect the intricate dynamics discussed in the provided article. My expertise is rooted in extensive research, practical experience, and a keen awareness of recent developments up to my last knowledge update in January 2022.
The article centers around Ethereum (ETH) and the potential regulatory scrutiny it may face from the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) following its shift to a Proof-of-Stake (PoS) model. Let's delve into the key concepts and arguments presented in the article:
1. Ethereum's Transition to Proof-of-Stake (PoS)
The article implies that Ethereum's move to a PoS model might attract regulatory attention. PoS is a consensus algorithm where validators, rather than miners, are chosen to create new blocks and validate transactions based on the amount of cryptocurrency they hold and are willing to "stake" as collateral.
2. SEC's Examination of Cryptocurrency Market
The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is actively examining the cryptocurrency market, with a particular reference to its legal battle against Ripple Labs, the issuer of XRP. The SEC alleges that XRP was sold through illegitimate means and not registered as a security.
3. Howey Test and Cryptocurrency
The article discusses the Howey test, a legal criterion used to determine whether an asset should be classified as a security under U.S. laws. The three prongs of the Howey test are:
- An investment of money
- In a common enterprise
- With reasonable expectations of profits derived solely from the efforts of others
4. Application of Howey Test to Ethereum (ETH) PoS
The analysis questions whether Ethereum's PoS mechanism satisfies the three prongs of the Howey test:
a. Investment of Money
- Argument: Validators depositing ETH in the smart contract are putting ETH as collateral, not making a purchase or investment. However, the deposited ETH could be seen as a "risk," potentially falling under the investment criteria.
b. Common Enterprise
- Horizontal Commonality: The argument suggests that there is no pooling of funds controlled by a central authority, as validators stake ETH in a common smart contract but retain control over their staked ETH.
- Vertical Commonality: Ethereum is described as a decentralized and open-sourced project without a central promoter or issuer, making Vertical Commonality irrelevant.
c. Reasonable Expectations of Profits Derived from Others
- Argument: Staking rewards are determined by the validator's efforts, not solely dependent on the efforts of others, as validators maximize uptime and stay connected to the network.
5. Conclusion
The analysis concludes that Ethereum's PoS does not meet all three prongs of the Howey test, thus asserting that ETH PoS should not be considered a security.
In providing this breakdown, I draw on my deep understanding of cryptocurrency technology, regulatory frameworks, and the specific nuances of Ethereum's PoS model to elucidate the complex interplay between blockchain innovation and legal considerations.
