Hester Peirce Hits Again says, SEC Focus Misplaced over Bitcoin ETF

In a recent interview Hester Peirce, the Commissioner at SEC, who went vocal over her dissent over Commission’s order disapproving a proposed rule change, as amended, to list and trade shares of the Winklevoss Bitcoin Trust on Bats BZX Exchange, Inc shared her “no reason for us not to allow this product to go ahead and trade on the exchange” views.

Hester Peirce SEC’s working and views on cryptos

SEC commissioner @HesterPeirce talks about why she believes the last Bitcoin ETF should be approved. Huge insight as to how the SEC work and whether we can expect an ETF soon.

Please subscribe if you want more content.https://t.co/D5yRUsl9df

— Ran NeuNer (@cryptomanran) August 1, 2018

Hester Peirce name has been among the Media as she was the one commissioner on the SEC panel of 4 who actually was in favor of the Bitcoin ETF filed by Winklevoss twins. The application was although rejected by a vote of 3-1, as Peirce couldn’t convince other commissioners on the panel with her views. Displeased with the decision, she even went public as she filed a letter of dissent against the order.

While answering Ran NeuNer, she put forward some great points which explains the way things work in the SEC and her opinion on the Bitcoin ETF. According to her, the SEC has an important role to play in telling the world that the United States capital markets are open to innovation.

According to Peirce, it is the staff that does the analysis of the application and puts forward its decision which eventually is appealed to the Commission panel for approval. The Commission (a set of 5 members) then votes, and as the majority decides becomes the final order.

Also, read: Over 25 Bitcoin ETFs in the Market, What’s so Special about VanEck’s Bitcoin ETF

“No reason for us not to allow this product” asserts Peirce

While speaking on the decision, she said that,

“according to the commission a rule change was required to trade this product and so the majority of the Commission said that the proposed change was actually not consistent with the governing statute in this case that’s the Securities Exchange Act. I take the position that actually the change that was before us was consistent with the Exchange Act there’s no reason for us not to allow this product to go ahead and trade on the exchange.”

The commissioners cited a few reasons for the rejections one being that the markets that trade bitcoin are unregulated. According to her, the other commissioners looked through the underlying asset, in this case, that would be Bitcoin, and raised some concerns about the market for that underlying product which she believes was beyond the statute of the SEC.

She believes that the commissioners should have really focused on the market where the exchange-traded product would trade as opposed to focusing on the underlying Bitcoin markets.

She added that,

“For SEC instead to go and look at how those (crypto) markets are actually working, we should be focused on the market that’s trading the security which in this case would be the exchange-traded product”.

On being asked about the VanEck ETF she wouldn’t want to comment on an application as it is still under review but believes the SEC should look for ways to increase opportunities for investors.