Binance and CZ Files Motion to Dismiss SEC Complaint Over Crypto Security Claims

Binance and its former CEO, Changpeng Zhao (CZ), are pushing back against the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) latest legal filing, demanding that the amended complaint be dismissed.

This move highlights Binance's ongoing struggle against the growing regulatory pressure from US authorities, as the SEC continues its aggressive stance on cryptocurrency regulations.

Binance Challenges SEC's Vague Standards for Crypto Regulations

The heart of Binance's legal defence revolves around the SEC’s failure to establish clear guidelines on when crypto asset transactions should be considered investment contracts under US securities law.

The exchange’s legal team argues that this lack of clarity is causing confusion among market participants, leaving them uncertain about which transactions fall under securities laws.

According to the lawyers, the SEC's position that nearly all crypto transactions qualify as securities is overly broad and lacks legal foundation.

“The SEC’s amended complaint continues to insist that virtually all transactions involving crypto assets are securities transactions, simply because some buyers might hope the assets will increase in value,” Binance’s lawyers stated in their filing.

They further claim that such a vague interpretation threatens to plunge the entire cryptocurrency industry into regulatory uncertainty.

The Ripple Effect: Court Rulings and Legal Precedents

Binance’s legal team also points to past court rulings as a critical part of their argument, particularly the SEC's ongoing battle with Ripple.

They argue that the SEC’s actions contradict previous judicial interpretations, most notably the ruling in the SEC vs. Ripple case, where Judge Analisa Torres decided that XRP only qualified as a security when sold to institutional investors.

The legal team’s stance is that the SEC has ignored the logical implications of this ruling.

They contend that crypto assets should not automatically be considered securities, especially when they are traded on secondary markets long after their initial distribution.

They highlight the ongoing legal battle with Ripple, which is expected to drag on until at least July 2025, as evidence that the SEC has failed to embrace the full implications of this court decision.

Selective Enforcement and Inconsistent Standards

Another aspect of Binance’s defence is the SEC’s decision to drop claims related to Ethereum (ETH) without explanation.

Binance’s lawyers suggest that this move shows selective enforcement by the SEC, raising concerns about inconsistencies in the regulator’s approach.

“The SEC recently abandoned its claim that transactions involving Ether are investment contracts,” the filing noted, adding weight to their argument that the regulator is not applying the same standards across the board.

This apparent inconsistency has fueled concerns that the SEC is cherry-picking which crypto assets to target, rather than adhering to a clear and universal regulatory framework.

The Broader Crypto Industry’s Growing Resistance

Binance’s challenge to the SEC’s complaint is part of a broader pushback within the cryptocurrency sector.

Other exchanges, such as Kraken, have also voiced opposition to the SEC’s attempts to regulate crypto assets as securities.

Kraken, in particular, has argued that the SEC is imposing “arbitrary” standards without providing any clear guidance on how digital assets should be classified.

“The SEC has no authority to regulate Kraken’s digital asset trading platform […] because the Digital Assets are not securities or investment contracts,” Kraken said in response to the SEC’s actions.

This growing resistance reflects the broader frustration in the crypto industry over the lack of clear and consistent regulations, which many believe are essential for operating within the bounds of US law.

A Legal Battle That Could Shape the Future of Crypto Regulations

As the legal battle between Binance and the SEC continues to unfold, the outcome is likely to have far-reaching implications for the future of crypto regulation in the United States.

With other companies facing similar challenges, including Immutable, which recently received a Wells notice from the SEC, it’s clear that this issue is becoming a focal point for the entire industry.

The SEC’s aggressive approach to regulating crypto assets will likely set the tone for future enforcement actions, but the ongoing pushback from major players in the crypto space, such as Binance, suggests that a clear and fair regulatory framework may still be some way off.