SEC Restricts Telegram from Tokenizing

The United States Securities and Exchange Commission has disclosed its intention to sue two establishments, Telegram and TON, for the possession of unregistered coin exchange.

In the filing documented against Telegram in the Federal District Court in Manhattan, the organization declares that Telegram made sales of about 2.9 billion cryptocurrency coins (GRM) to an aggregate of one hundred and seventy-one patrons for $1.7 billion. About $424.5 million of that amount is alleged to belong to thirty-one U.S. citizens.

Consequently, the organization has procured an interim restraining order barring the company and its blockchain, TON from dropping an ICO. The regulatory authority is aspiring to gain “certain emergency relief”, also, to procure lasting sanctions. This new development has caused the company to reconsider the preliminary debut period of TON which was set on the 31st of October.

Trouble for TON’s $1.7 Billion Listing?
The issue relating to the TON coin trade started when the biggest possessor of the GRM coin, Gram Asia, began trading the holding to its GRM possession in collaboration with Japan-based cryptocurrency exchange, Liquid, at $4 for a coin, thereby multiplying the prior price of $1.33.

The exchange of TON tokens violated the set investment agreement. As stated by the contract, buyers were requested to not sell the holding rights before the release. This has caused the organization to step in, days before the debut of TON, with a restraining order, stopping the listing.

The organization’s complaint declares that Telegram failed to report the exchange of the GRM, which is regarded as a security by the SEC.

The Securities Act of 1993 which specifies that every security is enlisted with the organization, which has caused the organization to consider the exchange of the GRM found as “unlawful”.

However, based on reports, Telegram notified the organization that its $850 million ICOs were formulated based on Rule 506(c) and Regulation S under the Securities Act of 1993. This implies that since the GRM coins were traded solely to accredited investors, there was no requirement for the product to be enlisted with the organization.

Share with other traders!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *