In a new enforcement action that adds fuel to the ongoing regulatory battle over digital assets, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has sued Chicago-based crypto trading firm Cumberland DRW. The lawsuit, filed on October 10, 2024, accuses Cumberland of operating as an unregistered broker and handling over $2 billion worth of crypto assets—specifically, tokens like Solana and Polygon—that the SEC claims are unregistered securities.
SEC's Allegations
According to the SEC, since 2018, Cumberland has facilitated trades of digital assets that meet the legal definition of securities but were never registered as such. The agency asserts that by failing to register, Cumberland violated federal securities laws. The SEC's suit seeks several remedies, including disgorgement of profits Cumberland earned from these trades, civil penalties, and a court order mandating compliance with registration requirements.
Jorge G. Tenreiro, acting chief of the SEC's Crypto Assets and Cyber Unit, issued a strong statement in connection with the lawsuit. "Cumberland profited from its dealer activity in these assets without providing investors and the market with the important protections afforded by registration," Tenreiro said.
Cumberland's Response
Cumberland has responded assertively, vowing to defend itself against the charges. In a statement shared on social media platform X (formerly Twitter), the firm indicated that it would continue business as usual. "We are not making any changes to our business operations or the assets in which we provide liquidity. We are confident in our strong compliance framework," Cumberland stated. The company also suggested that it had been in discussions with the SEC for five years regarding the regulatory status of crypto assets, implying it was caught off guard by the lawsuit.
Gensler's Crypto Crackdown
SEC Chair Gary Gensler has been a vocal advocate for treating many cryptocurrencies as securities, a stance that has intensified under his leadership. Gensler argues that existing securities laws, some dating back 90 years, are broad enough to cover most digital assets. His regulatory approach has made him a polarizing figure in the crypto space and a focal point in the 2024 U.S. presidential election. Both Republican nominee Donald Trump and Democratic Vice President Kamala Harris have expressed opposition to Gensler's aggressive enforcement tactics, with Trump promising to fire Gensler if elected and reports suggesting Harris may do the same.
Over half of the SEC's crypto-related enforcement actions since 2015 have taken place during Gensler's three-year tenure, targeting firms ranging from startups to major exchanges like Coinbase and Binance.
A Broader Battle Over Crypto Regulation
Cumberland's case is the latest in a growing list of legal battles between crypto companies and the SEC. Many crypto firms have preemptively sued the SEC, seeking judicial clarity on whether digital assets qualify as securities. The industry has long argued that crypto tokens are more akin to commodities, and thus should not be subject to the SEC's jurisdiction.
This regulatory tug-of-war has even sparked public disagreements within the SEC itself. Commissioner Mark Uyeda, one of two Republicans on the five-member Commission, recently criticized Gensler's handling of crypto regulation, calling it a "disaster" during a Fox Business interview.
As the case against Cumberland unfolds, the stakes remain high, not just for the trading firm but for the entire cryptocurrency industry, which continues to operate in a legal gray area.
Conclusion
The SEC's lawsuit against Cumberland DRW is yet another significant move in the ongoing debate over how crypto assets should be regulated. As both Cumberland and the SEC prepare for what could be a lengthy legal battle, the outcome will likely have lasting implications for how digital assets are classified and traded in the U.S. Until clearer regulatory guidelines emerge, firms operating in the crypto space must remain vigilant and prepared for increased scrutiny from regulators.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.