The CFTC Take A Stance Amid SEC’s Legal Tussle with Telegram

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission(CFTC) has issued an opinion on the legal battle between Telegram and the Security Exchange Commision. On February 18th, CFTC filed a letter following an New York Southern District Court Judge sought an opinion regarding the dispute that is currently in play. The dispute stems from the functioning of Telegram’s electronic currency called Gram. Profit Builder claims that the bot has a 99.8 percent accuracy rate, which we could not check. The letter says that this digital currency must be considered an asset and not considered a security. Although the letter was released by the office of the General Counsel at CFTC It is stated that this opinion comes solely from the division, and not a statement from CFTC in general.

The opinion supports the assertion that Gram is not a security that needs registration in accordance with the Securities Act of 1933

The agency also notifies that despite the fact that it does not consider the digital asset as commodities however, the terms that are in Commodity Exchange Act state that various securities are commodities, and that security laws apply to the latter. The agency’s decision is as it reads: “Thus, any given digital asset could or might remain exempt from securities laws, but it is not dependent in the event that the digital asset falls within the definition of considered a commodity. It is contingent upon how much the item is “security in the sense of the ’33 Act. .” This explains CFTC not coming to an explicit statement regarding its Gram tokens. The agency does not appear to have a clear idea of the matter. A crucial trial regarding the SEC vs.

Telegram case was set for the 19th of February. Reuters informed that United States District Judge Kevin Castel of Manhattan will decide the two competing motions to summary judgment. According to reports, the ongoing legal battle between SEC as well as Telegram is mostly concerned with the validity of a token sale as investing in a contract. The dispute started when the SEC filed a lawsuit to challenge Gram’s position on this market back in October of last year. Telegram’s contention is the same: Grams does not constitute an investment product , whereas the SEC insists it is Grams can be considered a security that is subject to the securities laws.