Crypto’s Compliance Conundrum

by

With Bitcoin climbing higher and institutional investors funneling more than $20 billion into cryptocurrency ETFs, there’s a significant transformation happening in the digital asset marketplace. The selection of Paul Atkins as SEC Chair, who supports market-based solutions over strict enforcement, has sparked hope that the crypto industry might find a harmonious blend of innovation and regulation at last.

In essence, the cryptocurrency sector is confronted with a significant dilemma: they can either forfeit the unrestricted programming capabilities that set these systems apart, or acknowledge that complete automation or built-in anti-money laundering compliance isn’t feasible. This challenge isn’t a temporary issue specific to certain technologies; it’s as inherent as mathematical principles.

Automating Market Integrity

Let’s imagine an economy where seashells serve as currency. If we establish a rule that individuals can only make ten transactions per day and possess no more than 10% of the shells, enforcing this law becomes tricky. After all, it’s challenging to keep track of who owns which shells when there’s information asymmetry at play. This asymmetry makes compliance difficult because it turns into a monitoring challenge instead.

Employing blockchain technology ensures this issue is addressed effectively. When all participants have constant visibility over all the ‘shells’, it fosters an environment conducive to enforcement. By embedding compliance within the system, prohibited transactions can be prevented automatically. Essentially, the transparency inherent in blockchain technology facilitates automated adherence to rules.

Instead of relying on traditional interfaces, Web3 aims at empowering users by enabling them to generate their own assets and scripts. However, this open access for publishing intricate programs could potentially expose users to harmful software or deceptive practices, overload the system, and create challenges for regulators seeking to combat financial fraud.

The fundamental issue we’re dealing with is often referred to by computer scientists as “undecidability.” In conventional finance, regulatory directives such as “no dealings with blacklisted entities” or “maintaining sufficient capital reserves,” can be met by banks using their established control mechanisms. However, in a fully decentralized system where anyone can create complex smart contracts, it becomes theoretically impractical to preemptively confirm whether a fresh piece of code might breach these rules due to the inherent mathematical impossibility.

The fact that JPMorgan has renamed Onyx to Kinexys demonstrates this situation clearly. Now, the platform handles more than $2 billion in transactions each day, and only those who fulfill regulatory requirements are allowed to participate. Unlike many cryptocurrency platforms where anyone can create and deploy automated trading programs (often referred to as smart contracts), JPMorgan’s system ensures compliance by limiting participants’ actions.

This method has drawn significant attention from large institutional investors such as BlackRock and State Street, collectively managing over $15 trillion in assets. Some crypto advocates see these regulations as contradictory to the technology’s original vision. However, these concessions are not merely practical decisions – they’re essential for any system that strives to adhere to regulatory standards.

In today’s digital era, the responsibility of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to safeguard investors and foster investment opportunities has become significantly intricate. During Gary Gensler’s tenure, the SEC adopted a rigorous enforcement strategy towards cryptocurrency markets, viewing most digital assets as securities subject to stringent supervision. However, although Kevin Atkins’ proposed principles-based approach may appear more flexible, it cannot overcome the inherent mathematical restrictions that prevent automated compliance in open, fully programmable systems with no access control.

At MakerDAO, one of the biggest decentralized lending platforms with more than $10 billion worth of assets, it was evident during the market chaos in March 2024 that fully automated systems have their drawbacks. When Bitcoin’s price fluctuated rapidly by 15% every hour, MakerDAO’s automatic systems initiated a chain reaction of forced liquidations that came close to causing the platform’s collapse.

As a system analyst, I’ve observed that despite decades of meticulous refinement and investments exceeding $50 million, the protocol I was working on needed urgent human intervention to avoid a catastrophic $2 billion loss. Incidents similar to this at Compound and Aave, managing an additional $15 billion in assets collectively, highlight that this wasn’t an isolated event. This went beyond a technical glitch; it underscored the inherent limitation of programming systems to foresee every possible scenario while adhering to regulatory standards.

Towards Compliant Crypto

The industry now faces three paths forward, each with distinct implications for investors:

Initially, consider emulating JPMorgan’s strategy by developing regulatory-compliant systems that prioritize clear rules over complete decentralization. This method is already gaining popularity: six of the top ten global banks introduced similar projects in 2024, managing transactions valued at more than $2 trillion collectively. The increasing number of regulated crypto products, such as ETFs and tokenized securities, underscores this approach’s validity.

2. Restrict blockchain systems to straightforward, consistent actions that can be easily verified for adherence to regulations. This is the strategy implemented by Ripple through its newly introduced RUSD, which conforms to the standards set by the New York Department of Financial Services using the framework of a limited purpose trust company. Although this may limit innovation due to the narrow scope of user actions, it facilitates decentralization within clearly defined guidelines.

3rd Option: Maintain the goal of unrestricted programming, understanding that these systems can’t ensure robust regulatory assurances. This strategy, adopted by platforms such as Uniswap with a staggering $1 trillion total trading volume in 2024, is encountering increasing obstacles. The recent crackdowns on similar platforms in Singapore, the U.K., and Japan hint that this approach might not have long-term viability in developed economies.

In the rapidly changing investment world, it’s evident where things are headed. The surge in market excitement, primarily fueled by regulated investments such as ETFs, points towards the first choice. Initiatives that adapt to and resolve the underlying limitations, instead of resisting them, appear more likely to succeed. This is why traditional financial institutions’ blockchain projects, though with their own limitations, are experiencing significant expansion – JPMorgan’s platform alone reported a 127% rise in transaction volume this year.

In the upcoming phase of cryptocurrency, it’s expected that the tales of triumph will probably belong to hybrid systems that skillfully blend creativity with realistic limitations. Investment possibilities can be found in both regulated environments that offer transparent compliance assurances and innovative initiatives that carefully confine their operations to establish provable safety features.

In a maturing market, it’s essential for investors to grasp the mathematical limitations as they weigh risk and allocate their portfolios effectively. The data is evident in market trends: regulated cryptocurrency platforms have averaged returns of 156% over the past year, whereas unregulated platforms are experiencing heightened volatility and regulatory uncertainties.

In a simpler and more conversational manner: While Atkins’ method, which is based on principles rather than specific rules, might give us more room to maneuver, it doesn’t change the fact that automated compliance in technology has its own set of boundaries. Just like physical laws govern what can happen in our world, these mathematical principles establish unchangeable limits within financial technology. The fantasy isn’t about cryptocurrency as a concept, but rather the belief that we can have complete freedom in programming, absolute decentralization, and full regulatory compliance simultaneously – a dream that might just be too good to be true.

To truly realize the transformative power of cryptocurrencies, it’s crucial to accept and adapt to certain unchangeable boundaries. Instead of aiming to surpass the mathematical restrictions, success in this evolving phase lies with those who invent smart strategies to operate harmoniously within these limitations.

This passage suggests that the opinions shared within this article belong solely to the writer, and they may not align with the perspectives of CoinDesk Inc., its owners, or related entities.

Read More

2025-01-13 18:17