Coinbase: Kentucky dismisses the lawsuit on staking and pushes towards crypto-friendly policies

The Kentucky has officially closed the legal proceedings against Coinbase related to the staking services offered by the exchange.

With this decision, the State joins Vermont and South Carolina in withdrawing the legal actions taken in recent months, confirming a trend reversal in state policies towards greater openness to the crypto sector.

The decision was formalized on March 31, through a joint filing submitted by the Kentucky Department of Financial Institutions.

The reason for the lawsuit? The accusation against Coinbase of having offered staking services as “unregistered securities.” An accusation that, at least in Kentucky, is no longer upheld.

 

Summary

A growing trend in Kentucky with Coinbase: away with the lawsuits, forward with pro-crypto legislation

The case of Kentucky is not isolated. In mid-March, Vermont withdrew its case after the SEC had previously filed its federal proceedings against Coinbase.

A few days later, on March 27, it was South Carolina’s turn, which withdrew its legal action following protests from local users, who had complained of losses of about 2 million dollars in staking rewards.

Paul Grewal, Chief Legal Officer of Coinbase, commented positively on X about Kentucky’s decision, urging Congress to intervene with a regulation that is consistent and unified at the federal level.

It also emphasized the bipartisan agreement in the State that staking, as well as mining, should not be treated as financial instruments.

Currently, legal proceedings against Coinbase remain ongoing in seven states: California, New Jersey, Illinois, Washington, Alabama, Maryland, and Wisconsin.

Simultaneously with the dismissal of the case, Kentucky approved a law of great significance for the crypto ecosystem. On March 28, Governor Andy Beshear signed House Bill 701, also known as the Bitcoin Rights Bill.

The law, unanimously approved in both chambers, establishes important rights for citizens and businesses operating in the bull and bear cryptocurrency sector.

Among the key points:

  • Right to self-custody of digital assets
  • Possibility to operate blockchain nodes without restrictions
  • Free cryptocurrency transaction without fears of discriminatory regulations
  • Protection for mining activities from penalizing urban planning regulations
  • Clarity on staking regulations, excluding it from the category of financial securities

Furthermore, another bill is under discussion that would allow the State Investment Commission to invest up to 10% of the excess state reserves in Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies.

A pro-Bitcoin legislative wave in the USA States

Kentucky is not the only state to embrace a positive view towards criptovalute.

Oklahoma has recently put forward the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve Act, a proposal to create a strategic reserve of BTC. Missouri and Arizona are following similar paths, considering the establishment of state funds in digital assets.

Even in South Carolina, the decision to dismiss the case against Coinbase was accompanied by the introduction of a law that authorizes the state treasurer to hold up to one million BTC as a digital reserve.

A measure proposed by the deputy Jordan Pace. The progressive withdrawal of lawsuits against Coinbase and the advancement of laws favorable to digital assets indicate a change in the attitude of state authorities.

More and more legislators seem to prefer regulatory clarity over legal repression, in open contrast to the SEC’s strategy.

These developments could accelerate the debate on a federal regulatory framework, hoped for by both industry operators and the political world.

The case of Kentucky, therefore, could represent a turning point: fewer lawsuits, more clarity. A message that resonates strongly in an America increasingly interested in defining its role in the future of cryptocurrencies.

Related Posts

Deploying smart contracts on the Ethereum blockchain

First of all, one or more developers must obviously create the smart contract by writing the appropriate lines of code, and then they must send it to the Ethereum network.

In technical terms, publishing it on the Ethereum blockchain means making all the nodes in the network receive and execute it. Once published, all instructions in it will always be executed by all nodes in exactly the same way.

Therefore, not only its publication but also the execution of instructions is irreversible once it is published on the blockchain.

Therefore, what really matters are the instructions it contains – which can be the most diverse – and how many people use it. Indeed, in order for the instructions of a smart contract to actually be executed, there must be one or more transactions that invoke them.

It is also worth remembering that these instructions generally involve the use of resources, such as data or tokens, so for them to actually be executed, all the conditions set as necessary must be met. 

Sometimes this data comes from outside, thanks to so-called oracles, while sometimes it simply comes from transactions on the blockchain.

Usually, the transaction that triggers the execution of the instructions contained in a smart contract involves the payment of a fee in ETH, and in many cases in order to actually trigger the execution also involves the payment or sending of tokens specific to the smart contract itself, or other smart contracts.

Technically, smart contracts are a type of account on the Ethereum blockchain, “controlled” by the network rather than a central entity. They can store ETH or tokens, and can also send transactions on the network autonomously.

A contract in the Solidity language would be like a kind of union of a code (the functions) and data (its state) located at a specific address on the Ethereum blockchain. Each contract contains declarations of state variables, functions, function modifiers, data structures and events.

The MiCA regulation, which came into force with the aim of uniformly regulating the cryptocurrency sector within the European Union, imposes new conditions that particularly concern:

  • – The mandatory authorization of crypto service providers
  • – The transparency of whitepapers
  • – The reserve requirement for stablecoin issuers
  • – Surveillance on systemic risks

One of the main impacts is precisely on stablecoins, like USDT, which will have to demonstrate that they have solid, transparent, and accessible reserve assets.

The platforms that wish to maintain the trading of these tokens within the European market will need to ensure that the assets are fully compliant.

Leave a Reply