• Binance files a protective court order, countering the SEC’s information requests as “over-broad” and “unduly burdensome.”
• Earlier in June, Binance and its CEO faced a lawsuit from U.S. regulators over allegations including misleading investors and operating deceptively.

Binance Stands Against SEC’s Comprehensive Probes

In a significant move, Binance, a dominant figure in the crypto world, has filed for a protective court order against the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). This action comes in light of what Binance describes as extensive and unwarranted requests for information from the regulatory authority.

Delving into the specifics, in a submission to the US District Court of Columbia, BAM Trading and BAM Management, which operate under the umbrella of Binance U.S., asserted that they have already met the regulator’s data needs. The essence of their argument revolves around the SEC’s demands being not just expansive, but also placing an undue strain on their operations.

One of the primary objectives of the protective order is to curtail the scope of the SEC’s reach. Binance suggests limiting the regulatory body to merely four depositions from BAM employees. Additionally, the crypto giant has expressed its intent to exempt the depositions of key figures, specifically BAM’s Chief Executive and its Chief Financial Officer, without explicitly mentioning any names.

This tussle between Binance and the SEC traces back to June when the regulatory body leveled substantial allegations against both Binance and its Chief Executive, Changpeng Zhao. These accusations were far from minor, highlighting a purported “web of deception.” The SEC’s 13-charge list was comprehensive, ranging from claims of Binance artificially boosting its trading volumes to accusations of misleading investors regarding its market surveillance mechanisms.

Yet, Binance remains unyielding in its stance. They’ve pointed out that the SEC, despite its fervent investigations, has failed to produce any concrete evidence hinting at the misuse or misappropriation of customer assets.

Moreover, the SEC, it seems, hasn’t shown much flexibility. The regulatory body has turned down BAM’s attempts to reasonably confine its information requisitions and remains steadfast against the motion for a protective order, as per the recent filing.

As this legal saga continues, both parties – Binance and the SEC – have yet to offer a public comment on the unfolding situation. The crypto community awaits further developments with bated breath, as this case might set significant precedents for future regulatory interactions.