If a crypto trading platform fails to identify U.S. customers and screen, monitor, and report participants and transactions pursuant to CFTC and FinCEN rules, individuals can be personally liable
Crypto co-founders personally liable for failure to register digital asset derivatives platform and failure to comply with necessary requirements
Millions in civil penalties have been assessed to such individuals for violation of the Commodity Exchange Act and operating unregistered futures commissions
The Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) recently announced that the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of New York entered consent orders against three co-founders of a cryptocurrency derivatives trading platform for $30 million in personal civil monetary penalties. This is not the first time the platform has been cited.
The court’s move highlights how important regulatory compliance is for fintech company founders – and emphasizes how they are personally responsible for ensuring that U.S. operations are undertaken with careful consideration of regulatory regimes and compliance requirements. These responsibilities include implementing procedures to identify U.S. persons using financial services, products, and platforms.   
The $30 million in civil penalties to be paid by the three co-founders result from the platform conducting significant aspects of the business from the U.S. and accepting orders and funds from U.S. customers to trade cryptocurrencies and derivatives through unregistered entities and without complying with applicable customer identification, screening, regulatory compliance, and consumer protection requirements. 
The personal liability flowing to the three co-founders stems from platform violations of the Commodity Exchange Act (CEA)by operating as a Futures Commission Merchant (FCM) without CFTC registration and failing to implement a Customer Information Program (CIP) and Know Your Customer (KYC) procedures that would enable the identification of U.S. persons using the platform. Further failures included a combination of violations of Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) and CFTC rules which require the implementation of an adequate Anti-Money Laundering (AML) program and customer identification program.
These personal civil penalties ordered for the platform’s founders highlight the paramount importance of regulatory analysis in the context of offering digital asset, cryptocurrency, and virtual currency services. The trading platform was not only cited for its unregistered derivatives products, but also for its failure to implement an appropriate BSA/AML program for related money transmission activities. The implementation of penalties and concurrent findings between the CFTC and FinCEN highlights the complex framework of regulatory requirements applicable to digital asset and fintech products. 
The May consent orders relate to a 2021 CFTC consent order for the company’s unregistered operation of the trading platform in violation of the CEA and CFTC regulations, and a concurrent enforcement action by FinCEN for violations of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and FinCEN regulations. The 2021 fines totaled more than $100 million in civil monetary penalties to be paid by the trading platform itself.
Acting CFTC Director of Enforcement Gretchen Lowe commented that, “Individuals who control cryptocurrency derivatives trading platforms conducting business in the U.S. must ensure that their platform complies with applicable federal commodities laws, including CFTC registration and regulatory requirements such as Know-Your-Customer and Anti-Money Laundering regulations.”
Regulators are taking a granular approach to addressing money laundering and terrorist financing concerns and, as FinCEN’s Deputy Director AnnaLou Tirol commented in 2021, “It is critical that platforms build in financial integrity from the start, so that financial innovation and opportunity are protected from vulnerabilities and exploitation.”
These orders highlight the high price founders may pay when they fall short of meeting their regulatory obligations by allowing unlicensed activities and unscreened persons on their platforms. Fintech founders should take care to weigh this recent announcement to ensure they meet their regulatory obligations in their U.S. operations. 
About this Author
Trace Schmeltz is a partner in the Chicago office of Barnes & Thornburg LLP, where he is the co-chair of the firm’s Financial, Corporate Governance, and M&A Litigation Group and a member of the White Collar Crime Defense Practice Group. A trial attorney with experience in numerous forums including the Delaware Court of Chancery, he concentrates his practice on securities, commodities, mergers and acquisitions and white collar criminal litigation. In addition, he has pursued and defended claims on behalf of auditors, investment banks, corporate boards and corporations….
Katerina (Katie) Mills assists with a range of financial services and digital asset regulatory matters, transactions, compliance, and licensure. Knowledgeable and driven, Katie works collaboratively with her colleagues and clients to find flexible and comprehensive solutions to meet clients’ needs.
She advises on day-to-day compliance issues, anti-money laundering and financial institution regulatory matters, payment products and cryptocurrency regulations, and issues involving financial technology products. She also as a deep understanding of…
As a woman owned company, The National Law Review is a certified member of the Women's Business Enterprise National Council
You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review’s (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC’s  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  
Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be  a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 
Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.
The National Law Review – National Law Forum LLC 3 Grant Square #141 Hinsdale, IL 60521  Telephone  (708) 357-3317 or toll free (877) 357-3317.  If you would ike to contact us via email please click here.


Write A Comment