"Changpeng Zhao is scheduled to appear in Seattle federal court Tuesday afternoon and enter his plea, the people said."
Resolves to the scale in which CZ has to pay for fines related to this specific plea (including potential fines in agreements with DOJ, FinCEN, CFTC, etc.)
Related questions
Hi all, first I want to apologize for being unclear and a bit wishy washy. The original intent of this question was put up for the total CZ would have to pay as part of the plea deal, but there are other charges/fines (notably from the CFTC).
I'm not out to screw anyone's league standings, so what happens next is up to you. Please vote and I will decide by EOD:
@Haws Are you separating CZ to be "The Person" and Binance to be "The Company" or are you combining them as "One Entity" for the framing of this question?
@SirCryptomind I did ask that in the first comment and it seems like this is only to be for things specifically aimed at CZ and not at Binance.
Ah ok, I See.
Well, it is generally that in scenarios like this that I have followed since 2006, that when an agreement is reached Between a Business and the DOJ that involves fines with FinCEN, CFTC, OFEC, that the "Individual" is treated separate. The fines are levied against the business because they were illegally received.
The only fine that I am aware of that is directly imposed on the individual himself (CZ), is the $50 million agreed upon in the sealed guilty plea. Unless there is something super spicy and highly unseen/under reported, I do not see FinCEN, CFTC, OFEC, DOJ, imposing anymore fines on the "Individual".
This is my own research, my own opinion, and if anyone trades off of my information, please do the research yourself before coming to a similar conclusion. You may well find something in history that says otherwise.
......Now the SEC....they are the ones you want to watch out for as an individual the most, I am pretty sure though they are not involved in this case besides sharing information for a "parallel investigation" of a different case.
So you think this part does not count against Zhao?
> The proposed consent order requires Binance to disgorge $1.35 billion of ill-gotten gains and pay a $1.35 billion civil monetary penalty to the CFTC, and obliges Zhao to pay a $150 million civil monetary penalty to the CFTC.
https://www.cftc.gov/PressRoom/PressReleases/8825-23
@Eliza I would say, personally, Yes CZ was given a monetary penalty, but that was under the "Business" side, that part is part of what was announced today already and not what is "pending to be known in 6 months" with the document unseal and sentencing.
That would be up to @Haws on how he wants to interpret it. But the sooner the clarification can be given, the less likely the market will get weird.
I only say this as a Business owner myself.
For Example:
If I was fined as a Business Owner on a lawsuit against my business and I pay a fine out of my pocket, that is against my business still.
If I commit a crime while running my business and am personally charged and pay a fine, that is me the individual.
Yes there are cases where both can be true. But with CZs Individual documents sealed, I keep leaning that the penalty imposed by the CFTC under the business to the individual would not count.
I will no longer hold a position, I will provide sources and guidance only.
@SirCryptomind are we talking the 150M that the cftc is charging him personally? The billion fines to binance don't count
@SirCryptomind That makes sense, I think what we really need is Haws to just completely clarify what they want to be asking. Maybe they want those CFTC to count as part of this, even though it may not on some technicality -- if so, then it should be clarified in the description.
@SirCryptomind just to be clear we want clarification on if the 150M counts. If so it will be added to the total as part of the agreement. At least this remains consistent with what I said in comments earlier.
@Haws I think it is just up to you if you want to count it or not count it. If you want to count it, write so in the description, basically. (And write it won't if you don't)
@Haws hopefully I'm not mudding water here. Kind of dealing with a personal crisis irl so I'm not 100% with it atm.
@Haws Nah You are good my man, there are times when a description may not fit the full scope or too much scope of a topic being asked. It'll get figured out, since you are very active.
A few of us are just on top of the CZ markets and watching them specifically.
@Eliza I wish there was a way to "Reverse All Trades" on a market if within the first 12-24 hours in cases like this when clarification is needed to reset all trades to trade off of the clarification.
I only like the idea to prevent anyone from making bad trades, but than again, we all have made bad trades on bad descriptions, so more a "do it and learn to be careful" approach I guess is still fine.
@Eliza Great question. SEC loves fines. Just super slow to impose, but they have no relation to the the case he is being sentenced in that I am aware of. They are not in any filings nor were besides a mention of "parallel investigations" they presented at the Press Conference while everyone else from other agencies involved were including Janet Yellen.
@SirCryptomind That's what I was thinking too! If any current/pending/future SEC actions are not included, we should probably get that added to the description for clarity. This entire event is very hard to form a comprehensive picture of.
@Eliza Yea, since the "Individual" part is sealed for 6 months, it makes for tricky markets. But If the creators can clarify these things in the description, that would be 100% ideal to help the situations that may arise.
@Eliza the sec making a fine may be out of scope of the plea itself, but if its proven as part that may change things.