The vast majority of arbitrage of fungible assets happens in commodities, not securities. The SEC regulates securities. The CFTC regulates commodities.

Ok, but these are clearly not commodities.

From the CFTC:

> Bitcoin is considered a commodity and is the underlying asset in bitcoin futures contracts… Bitcoin futures contracts — like other commodity futures contracts such as corn futures, market index futures, or gold futures — are regulated by the CFTC and must trade on CFTC-regulated exchanges.

https://www.cftc.gov/LearnAndProtect/AdvisoriesAndArticles/B...

Thanks for the reference. Between this, megadal's sibling-comment Wikipedia quote, and a quick search of "economic good", I believe I was mistaken.

10 years ago, I’d probably agree with you.

Today, you can spin up your own shit coin with basically a few clicks.

The fact that you can create a crypto more easily today has nothing to do with whether or not crypto is a commodity (though I suspect that point is not really why you made this comment).

It's the fact that there's an overwhelming number of exchanges that willingly accept crypto from other exchanges coupled with the fact that anyone can mine/produce crypto. The moment that there were two places to get BTC that accept BTC from each other in exchange for money, it was a commodity.

Clearly? What distinguishes them from beanie babies or used concert ticket stubs?

Why not? It is highly litigated and still abundantly unclear whether certain cryptocurrencies are securities or commodities. That's the whole point of these legal battles. If it was clear, they would not be ongoing.

based on the definition of what a security and what a commodity, it should be abundantly clear to anyone over the age of 5 what crypto falls under:

Commodities are consumable goods that get transformed through usage in industrial or commercial processes. Gold and silver can be transformed into jewelry. Securities, on the other hand, grant holders the right to periodic benefits like dividends, coupons, principal repayments and potential profit shares.

How are you consuming crypto? What commercial or industrial process are being used?

> Commodities are consumable goods that get transformed through usage in industrial or commercial processes. Gold and silver can be transformed into jewelry. Securities, on the other hand, grant holders the right to periodic benefits like dividends, coupons, principal repayments and potential profit shares.

> How are you consuming crypto? What commercial or industrial process are being used?

What rights does holding bitcoin confer to the holder? I get no dividends, coupons, principle repayments or potential profit shares.

We’ve nicely entered why this argument still rages on. It doesn’t fit cleanly into either definition.

From Wikipedia:

> In economics, a commodity is an economic good, usually a resource, that specifically has full or substantial fungibility: that is, the market treats instances of the good as equivalent or nearly so with no regard to who produced them.

I am pretty sure you can get BTC from any exchange and sell it on any other exchange. Whereas, with stocks, you generally cannot as a retail investor.

That is, I suppose, what makes crypto a commodity at its core.

> The vast majority of arbitrage of fungible assets happens in commodities, not securities.

Yeah, I'm gonna say no to that. I don't have numbers but if total trading volume on commodities is anything more than a tiny fraction of stock/derivatives trading on any given day I eat my proverbial hat.

Regardless, "The CFTC needs to sue us, not the SEC" isn't the argument being made by Robinhood either.

Derivatives are governed by the CFTC not the SEC.

It does matter, because they aren't doing anything wrong if these crypto assets are considered commodities and not securities.

Also, just because a government agency is suing you, that doesn't mean it has any legal or moral imperative. I don't see your point.

A trading instrument can be both a commodity and a security and thus subject to regulation by the CFTC and the SEC.

Most issuers try very hard to keep their instrument in one bucket to avoid the kind of issues that cryptocurrencies are dealing with.

I should have said "the derivatives in question" instead of simply "derivatives".

My point stands: OP claimed that most trading volume happens in securities and it simply does not. I highly doubt securities amount to more than the $20 quadrillion settled in the CFTC's realm last week.

I'm not claiming the jurisdictions of the CFTC and SEC are mutually exclusive. My point stands.

Again, that's wrong. The CFTC absolutely does not handle regulation of options and bond funds and ETFs, etc... You seem to be invoking this "commodities" thing as a trick, and that's not how it works. We've seen this repeatably now where the SEC has to come at crypto outfits with a cluebat and explain to them (in court!) that yes: crypto assets are securities. Why do you really think it's going to be different this time?

From the CFTC's official website:

"The Commodity Futures Trading Commission is an independent U.S. government agency that regulates the U.S. derivatives markets, including futures, options, and swaps."

Also from their official website: 20 quadrillion per week in settled trades. Too lazy to look up the equities numbers, but I would bet everything I own it's lower.

Also from the CFTC's website:

"Bitcoin is considered a commodity and is the underlying asset in bitcoin futures contracts… Bitcoin futures contracts — like other commodity futures contracts such as corn futures, market index futures, or gold futures — are regulated by the CFTC and must trade on CFTC-regulated exchanges."

SEC regulates securities-based derivatives. I used to professionally make markets in those.

SEC and CFTC are both claiming jurisdiction over Bitcoin.

Correct. And this case hinges on the yet undecided question as to whether or not Bitcoin and numerous other cryptocurrencies are actually securities.

Once more, it's not undecided. Coinbase tried exactly the same argument in their case and lost.

>The idea that crypto assets aren't "securities" and thus not subject to SEC regulation is, and always has been, laughable.

Except, ya know.. the courts.

Yeah, our courts, the CFTC, and previous SEC administrations, have given this some serious consideration. No, they don’t think it’s laughable.