The CFTC doesn't have that authority; a company can only get shut down for a criminal offense and Tether is not accused of any crime. Only the Department of Justice can prosecute or investigate crimes, the CFTC is an independent agency and as such has no authority to do so.
All the CFTC can do is levy a fine, so both parties are fairly indifferent as to whether that money comes from a judgement or from a settlement. There could be some minor benefit of not having to admit any "wrongdoing" for press release purposes, but overall it makes no difference.
I'm more surprised that anyone still holds Tether, unless they're stuck with it. The company has been caught in lies several times before, it's not as if a $41M fine will turn them honest.
> why this is something they can settle rather than something that gets them completely shut down
I'm a Tether sceptic. I wouldn't want to be the regulator (note: not prosecutor, different standards) to shut it down.
There was a moment when I suspected Tether may hold U.S. dollar money market securities. That would mean a collapse could spill to our financial markets. But that doesn't seem to be the case. The only people who would get hurt in its wake seems to be those who choose to keep using Tether despite the screaming warnings.
Those same people would make you public enemy No. 1 for bringing down the house of cards. So given the problem is contained to the people who oppose its solution, there isn't a great argument for allocating regulatory resources to this over anything else.
I'm not saying they shouldn't be shut down, but I genuinely wonder how that process would work. People don't have an account with Tether itself, so how would they be able to compel people to "return?" the Tethers and get their cash back?
Don’t really get you guys saying Tether should be shut down… the big banks get routinely fined with much bigger fines for much bigger crimes, are we gonna shut them all down then?
At least Tether did not steal from nor defraud anyone.
Just as a random example: https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/jpmorgan-chase-co-agrees-pay-...
Tether did defraud people. They lied on their website, claiming a) audits (which they never completed a single one of) and b) 1:1 backing of each Tether with a dollar in the bank (which they didn't have).
Will reply here rather than in all the sub-threads: I’m not saying lying is good, I’m pointing my finger at the paradox that on one side everybody is scandalized that Tether is not shut down, on the other everybody is happy to keep their money with big institutions that are proven to be even worse.
Yeah. The truth is the entire banking system is running the exact same scam ad Tether. The only difference is the governments think banks are too important to allow the consequences of their actions to catch up with them. So whenever there's a bank run and there's no money in the bank, the government bails them out.
I am blown away. 61.5 million dollars for $68,536,825,819 (68 billion dollars.) Maybe not the same in 2017 but damn, how does this even work without anyone panicking?
It was something like ~400 million tether at the time, not 68 billion. The recent run-up post-dates the period of this malfeasance (and is probably also fraudulent in some way).
Banks do the same thing. How do banks work without anybody panicking? Liquidity injections. The government will literally print money and give it to banks so they can fulfill withdrawals during bank runs. If the governments didn't bail them out, they'd be insolvent.
Sure, if you'd like to collect your winnings in bottle caps and IOUs.
And if the exchange you are shorting it on doesn't wipe your position out through a margin call, in one of those strange moments where due to a mysterious glitch, tether breaks the USD peg for a few seconds.
If you're looking for easier money, I'd recommend card-counting at a speak-easy ran by the mob, before I'd recommend getting into this business.
The CFTC claims to be helping end-customers by doing this kind of thing, but it is really taking money that could have been distributed off the table. Fining (and perhaps requiring the dismissal of) Tether's corporate officers would likely instill more discipline, but fining the company just hurts the customer.
No. This teaches scammers and customers alike that this is a risky business. Fining the corporate officers is almost certainly off the table, because Tether appears to be some form of limited liability corporation (but I don't know anything about the law in HK). Play stupid games, win stupid prizes. I'd hope the founders end up in jail for what appears to be blatant fraud... but chances are, they'll just move on to the next thing after Tether crumples.
It would be better to confiscate Tether's entire reserve, force them to allow tether holders to cash out (for fractional amounts), and punish the execs directly.
> perhaps requiring the dismissal of) Tether's corporate officers
That's okay, they'll just go to work for Bitfinex. Remember when the two claimed they were independent? And then Bitfinex loaned Tether $800M, and we'll call the two people who signed the loan contract for Bitfinex "Corporate Officer A" and "Corporate Officer B". Meanwhile, on the other side of the contract, we'll call the people who signed on behalf of Tether uhh... "Corporate Officer A" and "Corporate Officer B".
Or they'll go work for Deltec. Whose Deputy CEO will give interviews saying that "they can see the flow of all the Tether, because we are in the system and can see every transaction". Another legit, arms-length financial relationship, evidently...
[+] [-] tdeck|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Kranar|4 years ago|reply
All the CFTC can do is levy a fine, so both parties are fairly indifferent as to whether that money comes from a judgement or from a settlement. There could be some minor benefit of not having to admit any "wrongdoing" for press release purposes, but overall it makes no difference.
[+] [-] paulgb|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JumpCrisscross|4 years ago|reply
I'm a Tether sceptic. I wouldn't want to be the regulator (note: not prosecutor, different standards) to shut it down.
There was a moment when I suspected Tether may hold U.S. dollar money market securities. That would mean a collapse could spill to our financial markets. But that doesn't seem to be the case. The only people who would get hurt in its wake seems to be those who choose to keep using Tether despite the screaming warnings.
Those same people would make you public enemy No. 1 for bringing down the house of cards. So given the problem is contained to the people who oppose its solution, there isn't a great argument for allocating regulatory resources to this over anything else.
[+] [-] 300bps|4 years ago|reply
It’s incredible - they had 4x as much Tether as dollars backing it and lied about audits taking place that never happened.
[+] [-] BitwiseFool|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] silexia|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] AlexanderTheGr8|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] _3u10|4 years ago|reply
Why would misleading statements ever result in a shutdown of a company instead of a fine?
[+] [-] gws|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] ceejayoz|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tootie|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Marciplan|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gws|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xtracto|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] iammisc|4 years ago|reply
And most of the banks should have been shut long ago.
[+] [-] matheusmoreira|4 years ago|reply
They should just bail Tether out too.
[+] [-] system2|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] loeg|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] inopinatus|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] matheusmoreira|4 years ago|reply
They should just do the same for Tether.
[+] [-] danuker|4 years ago|reply
Ah, pulling the classic "fractional reserve" I see.
[+] [-] mensetmanusman|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] dylan604|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] satellites|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] robcohen|4 years ago|reply
It’s not reasonable to conflate decentralized cryptocurrency with digital coupon IOUs.
[+] [-] rkagerer|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] thaumasiotes|4 years ago|reply
Solution: take some of their money away.
[+] [-] jfk13|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] kangnkodos|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] FireBeyond|4 years ago|reply
But their cash backings say that that was most likely always bullshit, even as they move to "other instruments" (cough Chinese junk paper cough).
[+] [-] bagels|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vkou|4 years ago|reply
And if the exchange you are shorting it on doesn't wipe your position out through a margin call, in one of those strange moments where due to a mysterious glitch, tether breaks the USD peg for a few seconds.
If you're looking for easier money, I'd recommend card-counting at a speak-easy ran by the mob, before I'd recommend getting into this business.
[+] [-] buhrmi|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] sneak|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] roywiggins|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] missedthecue|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] SilasX|4 years ago|reply
(Reminds me of Zimbabwe having to come up with money to pay Switzerland for printing their hyperinflating currency.)
[+] [-] adflux|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] pkulak|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] unknown|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] iammisc|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] bob229|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] joelbondurant|4 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] nickff|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] klyrs|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] tdeck|4 years ago|reply
[+] [-] FireBeyond|4 years ago|reply
That's okay, they'll just go to work for Bitfinex. Remember when the two claimed they were independent? And then Bitfinex loaned Tether $800M, and we'll call the two people who signed the loan contract for Bitfinex "Corporate Officer A" and "Corporate Officer B". Meanwhile, on the other side of the contract, we'll call the people who signed on behalf of Tether uhh... "Corporate Officer A" and "Corporate Officer B".
Or they'll go work for Deltec. Whose Deputy CEO will give interviews saying that "they can see the flow of all the Tether, because we are in the system and can see every transaction". Another legit, arms-length financial relationship, evidently...