US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Commissioner Caroline Crenshaw has criticized recent staff guidance on liquid staking, warning that it fails to reflect the practice’s complexities.

On Aug. 5, the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance asserted that certain liquid staking arrangements, specifically those involving receipt tokens, do not fall under securities regulations.

However, Crenshaw pushed back, arguing that the statement adds confusion rather than clarity to the legal treatment of liquid staking.

“Instead of clarifying the legal landscape, today’s statement, like other recent staff statements before it, only muddies the waters.”

Crenshaw pointed to two major flaws in the SEC staff’s position. First, she said the guidance relies on a long list of questionable assumptions about how liquid staking operates. Second, the staff’s legal conclusions are heavily caveated, making them unreliable for firms trying to navigate compliance.

She noted that any staking activity not fitting the precise conditions described in the document would fall outside its scope. Because of this, she argued, the guidance offers little protection or direction to those involved in staking-related services.

Crenshaw also reminded investors that the guidance represents the opinion of SEC staff, not the official stance of the Commission itself. As such, she believes it should have been framed as a cautionary alert, not a position of regulatory clarity.

Lehman-like risks in crypto staking

Adding to the concerns, Amanda Fischer, a former SEC Chief of Staff under Gary Gensler, drew parallels between liquid staking and the risky financial practices that led to Lehman Brothers’ collapse in 2008.

In a post on X (formerly Twitter), Fischer warned that liquid staking could expose crypto markets to cascading failures. She explained that the practice allows users to deposit digital assets and receive a synthetic version of the same token, which can be reused to earn additional rewards.

According to Fischer, this mirrors how Lehman reused client assets to back high-risk trades. She argued that liquid staking could replicate the same vulnerabilities without strong regulatory oversight.

The former SEC official also highlighted the risks of relying on token issuers, the possibility of long delays when unstaking, and the threat of technical failures or hacks. Together, these factors could amplify systemic risk across the crypto sector.

Mentioned in this article

June 23rd Bitfinex alpha | Can BTC handle global confusion?

The crypto market was shaken last week as panic sales and forced liquidation forced major exchanges, pushing Bitcoin down by more than 11.5% since May. With just a long settlement, it has surpassed $400 million for three consecutive days. This is a rare event that shows a sharp reversal of emotions. As macros rose oil prices, fear of stags, and geopolitical tensions amplified traders and decreasing pressures, what began as a promising week for BTC quickly turned into one of the worst, just as headwinds amplified traders and decreasing pressures.

Total crypto market liquidation has skyrocketed above $2.6 billion, with AltCoins like ETH and SOL winning more than 20%. But amidst the chaos, the Bitcoin Spot ETF has recorded a strong net inflow of $1.02 billion, highlighting its growing institutional conviction. This structural demand helped stabilize the price of BTC within the $94 million to $110,000 range, even if the derivatives market caused a major deletion. With the current reset to healthier levels and funding rates normalised, the path ahead depends on whether ETF inflows will continue or whether this support break indicates a deeper change in the market mood.

The Federal Reserve stabilized interest rates in June, but it showed growing concern over economic growth, sustained inflation and slowing political pressure. Powell warns that tariffs are likely to cause a “meaning” rise in consumer prices as businesses take over costs, strengthening the Fed’s cautious attitude.

In addition to inflationary pressures, the global oil market is rattling, especially around the Strait of Hormuz, a key oil route. Surges in freight costs and lower tanker activity could lead to market uncertainty and oil prices as disruption escalates. Gasoline futures have already risen sharply, tightening consumer budgets and pose challenges for central banks.

On the consumer side, retail sales fell 0.9% in May, leading to lower spending on cars, fuel and restaurants. However, core retail sales are still increasing, suggesting resilient discretionary spending. Companies anticipating tariff hikes have been building wholesale inventory since late 2024, but retail shelves remained recognized. Retailers could see a second inflation, especially as they will be replenished at higher costs over the coming months, especially ahead of the holiday season. Together, rising oil prices, pass-throughs of tariffs, and seasonal replenishment could increase inflation by fall, complicating the Fed’s path and slowing down expectations rate reductions.

Donald Trump’s 2024 financial disclosures showed more than $600 million in revenue driven primarily by crypto ventures such as $Trump Coin and World Liberty Financial. His deep involvement in crypto, real estate and global branding has sparked ethical concerns about the blurred boundaries between business and politics.

At the same time, Vietnam passed groundbreaking laws that would grant crypto assets legal status from 2026, attracting blockchain innovation and providing incentives to establish itself as a local high-tech hub. Meanwhile, Nobitex, Iran’s biggest exchange, was hit by a politically driven cyber attack that destroyed assets of up to $100 million.

]]> https://earlybirdsinvest.com/bitfinex-alpha-can-btc-handle-global-confusion/feed/ 0 43750 https://earlybirdsinvest.com/ethereum-foundations-new-leadership-structure-causes-confusion/ https://earlybirdsinvest.com/ethereum-foundations-new-leadership-structure-causes-confusion/#respond Thu, 12 Jun 2025 20:00:56 +0000 https://earlybirdsinvest.com/ethereum-foundations-new-leadership-structure-causes-confusion/