FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
July 12, 2024
CONTACT
Carter Dougherty, carter@ourfinancialsecurity.org
Crypto Industry Pressure Fails to Secure Veto Override on Harmful Deregulatory Resolution
Washington, DC – The cryptocurrency industry’s lobbying efforts and hundreds of millions in campaign spending failed to generate enough congressional support to override President Biden’s veto of the Republican House’s effort to roll back Securities and Exchange Commission guidance designed to reduce the risks crypto assets can pose to investors and the market. Consumer protection advocates welcomed the vote as a good outcome for investor protection.
“The crypto industry’s gusher of campaign cash and nonstop lobbying did not succeed in overcoming the President’s veto, or increased the number of votes for this wrong-headed proposal,” said Mark Hays, senior policy analyst with Americans for Financial Reform and Demand Progress. “Yesterday’s failed vote is good news that protects investors, communities, and financial institutions from the volatility and fraud in crypto.”
The House of Representatives attempted to override Biden’s veto of a Congressional Review Act resolution (H.J. Res. 109) that would have rescinded SEC guidance (known as SAB 121) that recommended some specific protections to address the unique risks of crypto assets. The non-binding guidance provided recommendations for SEC registrants to address the endemic risk and volatility in the crypto sector, such as treating crypto assets they hold as liabilities on their balance sheet.
“This foiled crypto industry attack on the SEC is a victory for retail investors and the public,” added Hays. “The SEC must continue to stand up to the widespread deception and fraud in the crypto industry, and this vote quashes efforts by that industry and its paid-for Congressional champions to chill an important aspect of crypto oversight.”
Consumer, investor, and public interest groups had supported the SEC efforts in SAB 121 and opposed the effort to rescind the guidance with the Congressional Review Act which would have greatly weakened needed protections for retail investors and consumers.
###