Cryptocurrency News

SEC Has 9 Different Bitcoin ETF Proposals To Decide on For Approval by September

SEC Will Be Deciding About Different Bitcoin ETFs in the Next Two Months

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) will be analyzing the VanEck SolidX Bitcoin Trust ETF during the next months. It is important to mention that this is not the only crypto-exchange traded fund that is being analyzed by the regulatory agency. Indeed the SEC will have to decide on more than nine proposed bitcoin ETF.

The proposal made by SolidX and VanEck is just one of four filings that are now waiting, but it is also the most known and the most important for the community. This is the only ‘physical’ ETF currently being analyzed.

We can also mention other submissions from firms such as ProShares, Direxion and GraniteShares, making a total of 10 bitcoin-related funds. The deadlines are set at the moment the proposals are published in the U.S. Federal Register. The agency can make a decision 240 days after the publication.

The next deadlines are in August 23, 2018 for two funds from ProShares, in the next two weeks. This rule change for these products was submitted by the New York Stock Exchange Arca back on December the 4th, 2017.

September will be a very important month for the cryptocurrency community due to the fact that starting in September, two funds by GraniteShares will be receiving a final confirmation on whether they can operate or not.  Both funds were proposed back on January 5, 2108.

Furthermore the deadline for the four funds presented by Direxion is September the 21st. The funds have been presented on January the 4th.

The SEC has just delayed the approval of the VanEck SolidX Bitcoin Trust ETF Proposal on August the 7th, 2018. The markets reacted in a very negative way, and some currencies lost more than 13%.

If a Bitcoin ETF is approved, institutional investors could start entering the market and helping the price of the most important cryptocurrencies to grow. One of the main complaints made by the SEC was related to a lack of regulation and professionalism in the market.



Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here

Exit mobile version