54.8% of Publicly Funded Cryptos Could Be Securities in FINMA's Eyes, CryptoCompare Research Finds

Out of the top 200 cryptoassets, 78.5% would be classified as “receiving some sort of funding” and, out of these, over half would be considered securities by Switzerland’s financial supervisor, the Financial Market Supervisory Authority (FINMA), research found.

This according to CryptoCompare’s Cryptoasset Taxonomy Report, which followed guidelines FINMA set earlier this year to support initial coin offerings (ICOs). These determined there are three different token categories: payment tokens, utility tokens, and asset tokens.

As CryptoGlobe covered at the time, payment tokens are those that are set to only be used as a payment method. Utility tokens are those “intended to provide digital access to an application or service,” while asset tokens represent a share in a company or earning stream, or an “entitlement to dividends or interest payments.”

CryptoCompare’s report noted that FINMA’s regulations are clear on non-functional tokens that are tradeable – these are classified as securities. While asset tokens are also considered securities, utility tokens only fall into the category if they also or only have an investment function. Payment tokens, if functional, aren’t securities.

The global cryptocurrency market data provider’s report, using FINMA’s classifications, determined 65% of the top 100 cryptoassets by market cap are utilities, while 22% are payment tokens. The remaining 13% are “either asset tokens or combination use-cases.”

Breakdown of cryptoasset categories

Further, the report found that out of the top 200 cryptoassets, 157 would be classified as receiving “some sort of funding.” It further reveals that out of these 157 cryptoassets, “at least” 54.8% would be considered securities.

FINMA, earlier this year, clarified financial market laws and regulations aren’t applicable to all ICOs and, presumably, to all tokens. As such, the applicability of regulations to blockchain-based tokens will be determined on a case-by-case basis.

At the time, FINMA’s CEO Mark Branson noted the organization’s approach to ICOs was “balanced,” as it allowed legitimate innovators to launch their projects in Switzerland, while “protecting investors and the integrity of the financial system.”

ICO projects that issue payment tokens reportedly have to comply with anti-money laundering (AML) regulations. At the time Oliver Bussmann, the president of the Crypto Valley Association in the canton of Zug, predicted FINMA’s approach would increase the number of Switzerland-based ICOs.

Bitcoin Mining Pool Tries to Help Tone Vays Win $10K Bet Against Roger Ver

Cryptocurrency mining pool SlushPool has recently manually added a BTC transaction into a block to help Tone Vays, a derivatives trader and analyst, win a wager mage against BCH proponent Roger Ver.

The wager was made at the 2019 Malta AI & Blockchain Summit, during a debate between bitcoin (BTC) proponent Tone Vays and Bitcoin.com CEO and BCH advocate Roger Ver. In it, Ver argued BTC transactions are too expensive for business use due to the cryptocurrency’s small block size.

Vays, on the other hand, argued segregated witness (SegWit) and second-layer scaling solutions like the Lightning Network allow users to make small transactions without paying high fees, and that he has been using BTC on-chain without paying too much for transactions.

The debate ended up seeing Vays send Roger Ver $5 worth of BTC with a one satoshi per byte transactions fee – equal to the fees paid on the Bitcoin Cash chain – to see if it would confirm the same day. If it did, the CEO of Bitcoin.com claimed he would donate $10,000 to a charity of Vays’ choice.

During the debate, both parties noted the transaction was “priority 23,836 out of 24,355 transactions,” meaning that most transactions on the Bitcoin blockchain had to clear before miners picked that one up, at least according to fees paid for transactions.

As Vays soon noted on social media the transaction cleared after 10 hours. Some, however, found it strange. Cobra Bitcoin, the pseudonymous co-owner of Bitcoin.org and Bitcointalk, pointed out on social media that SlushPool – the mining pool that found the block the transaction was included in – manually added it to help Vays win the bet.

Cobra Bitcoin figured it wasn’t mined “naturally” as it was the second transaction included in the block – right after the coinbase transaction – despite the fee being less than 1% of that of all other transactions included in the block.

On Reddit, users pointed this out and accused SlushPool of manually adding the transaction. The mining pool, according to some users, is known for supporting BTC and being against Bitcoin Cash.

Should Roger Ver Pay?

The wager quickly became a controversial topic that seems to bring back memories of the scaling debate that was going on before Bitcoin Cash forked off of the Bitcoin network back in August of 2017.

Some argue that Roger Ver’s point stands as the transaction wasn’t “naturally” confirmed, but manually included in a block. Moreover the CEO of Bitcoin.com claimed he’d donate the money if it confirmed that day, and when the transaction did confirm it was past midnight in Malta.

On the other hand, some claim the transaction did go through anyway, and as such Roger Ver should donate the funds to a charity of Tone Vays’ choice. Moreover, Vays himself argued BCH supporters could have spammed the BTC mempool with two satoshis per byte transactions to stop his from clearing on time.

On Twitter, Vays created a poll that was retweeted by SlushPool and admitted the mining pool did prioritize the transaction. It currently shows most users believe Roger Ver should donate the funds. As one commenter pointed out, however, the results may change if Ver and other BCH supporters retweet the poll.