Stuart Alderoty Comments on SEC’s Meme Coin Ruling
Stuart Alderoty, Ripple’s chief legal officer, shared his thoughts on the recent U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) ruling regarding meme coins.
He expressed support for the SEC’s decision regarding this popular cryptocurrency type, especially considering the agency’s recent moves to improve relations with the crypto community. This shift follows the contentious policies of former SEC chairman Gary Gensler.
SEC Defines Meme Coins as Collectibles
On February 27, the SEC issued a press release describing meme coins as “a type of crypto asset inspired by internet memes, characters, current events, or trends.” The agency clarified that selling meme coins does not constitute an investment contract and does not suggest “a reasonable expectation of profits from the entrepreneurial or managerial efforts of others.” Instead, meme coins are categorized as collectibles, with their value derived from speculative trading and market sentiment.
Alderoty Supports SEC’s Classification
Alderoty highlighted the importance of the SEC’s classification, praising its simplicity. He emphasized that meme coins are not securities because they lack rights to income, profits, or assets. Alderoty believes that the SEC’s decisions should remain straightforward for the crypto industry to comprehend, insisting, “This doesn’t have to be complicated.”
> “The beauty of the SEC’s statement on MemeCoins is its simplicity… If fraud occurs, other agencies can act.” – Stuart Alderoty.
Prominent venture capitalist Anthony Pompliano commented that if the SEC classifies meme coins as collectibles, then it might lead to all assets being defined in the same way over time.
SEC Discontinues Multiple Crypto Cases
Recently, the SEC has dropped several major legal cases against prominent crypto companies that were initiated under Gensler, who resigned in January. The agency has dismissed cases against Coinbase, Robinhood, Uniswap, and recently against Consensus. The community is now anticipating new developments in the Ripple case.
Comments (0)