Voyager’s Agreement With Binance Is Approved by the Court; The United States Ignores SEC
Don’t invest unless you’re prepared to lose all the money you invest. This is a high-risk investment and you are unlikely to be protected if something goes wrong. Take 2 minutes to learn more
Now, Voyager must choose between carrying out the deal or completely liquidating it
In an effort to stop further market collapses, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has been the propelling factor behind a recent wave of inquiries into the cryptocurrency sector. Even though the caution of the commission is very much justified, some parties (a federal Judge inclusive) feel that it is being overdone.
Approval of a Deal Worth a Billion Dollar
Unexpectedly, the court has given Voyager Digital permission to proceed with their agreement with Binance, United States (according to Bloomberg). With the agreement, Voyager’s investors would be able to recover between 50 and 73% of their investment, subject to the resolution of Alameda’s legal action against the company as well as the recent rise in the value of virtually all crypto assets.
Voyager’s creditors currently stand to gain around $100 million more from the agreement if not liquidated. In the event that the agreement with Binance, United States is implemented, creditors would have to submit a request for a return through the Binance, United States platform. In case the courts require the company to return the money that was borrowed and then paid back by Alameda, Voyager has set aside $445 million to compensate Alameda.
Federal Judge Criticizes the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC)
As a reason for his decision to authorize the sale, the United States Bankruptcy Judge, Michael Wiles was furious with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Department of Justice (DOJ). He claims that, in the present situation, they were uncertain as to whether the sale will result in legal problems.
“I cannot put the entire case into an indeterminate deep freeze while regulators figure out whether they believe there are problems with the transaction and plan,” says Judge Michael Wiles.
After making some adjustments to the deal, Judge Wiles subsequently stated that he would approve of it.
Peter M. Aronoff, a legal representative for the Department of Justice (DOJ), stated that he and his colleagues are debating filing an appeal in opposition to the judge’s ruling.
It is important to keep in mind that the United States authorities’ sometimes excessive zeal may be justified. They worry that if the current arrangement is allowed, it may serve to legalize future deals of this kind as well, regardless of whether the people involved are sincere or not. After all, the law is precedent-based.
Judge Wiles, in his dimension, remarked that if the parties concerned could sue at will, even if the judge had previously accepted the settlement of the case, it would be impossible to resolve any bankruptcy cases.
At this point, the decision to take lies in the hand of the Voyager.
