The question of what the Ethereum cryptocurrency is is becoming urgent. House Republicans wrote an official letter to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, asking for clarification on whether ETH is considered a security.
Members of the US House of Representatives Finance Committee were interested in ETH for good reason. This concerns Prometheum's plans to offer storage services for this cryptocurrency on behalf of large companies.
In a letter addressed to SEC Chairman Gary Gensler, the congressmen said they wanted to analyze Prometheum's plans to provide ETH custody services (the company wants to provide them through its subsidiary Prometheum Capital). They warned that such actions could have serious and potentially irreversible consequences for digital asset markets.
What is it actually about? Politicians' concerns about the SEC's unclear position on Special Purpose Broker-Dealers (SPBD) and their ability to hold digital assets that are not securities, i.e. ETH.
Is it or isn't it, that is the question!
The problem is of a legal nature. It is still unclear whether ether is a security or not in the eyes of the SEC.
Gensler, who both in the media and during public hearings, does not want to answer the question of what ether is. This is crucial not only because of Prometheum's plans, but also regarding the creation of ETH ETFs.
In the letter, the congressmen expressed their concern about the lack of comprehensive guidelines or a specific regulatory framework for securities (in the context of cryptocurrencies and tokens), which increases the already considerable regulatory uncertainty.
The letter ends with a request to the SEC to finally take a clear position on the ether issue. Failure to do so, lawmakers warn, could threaten the integrity and competitiveness of U.S. digital asset markets, which will have far-reaching consequences for both investors and market participants.
