Ledger calls for better European TFR regulation

In a document addressed to political decision makers, the French rhinoceros explains why this regulation seems unjustified, and offers suggestions for improvement.

While the tripartite between the European Commission, the Council and the European Parliament on the regulation of TFR (For the “Money Transfer Regulations” which are intended to implement measures against money laundering) opens tomorrow in Brussels, Ledger is sounding the alarm.

Today, the French Unicorn, which markets cryptocurrency wallets, publishes a policy proposal entitled “How to win Web3: Four recommendations for EU policy makers” Aiming to enable the EU to seize the Web3 revolution and Avoiding organizational mistakes in the past. The information was first disclosed in Politico. The post comes on the heels of a letter the cryptocurrency industry sent to the 27 economy ministers of the European Union member states last week.

“Billions of euros, tens of thousands of jobs”

Ledger’s chief, Pascal Gauthier, in particular tweeted that Total Fertility could “The European Union is costing billions of euros, tens of thousands of jobs, and forcing the Web3 revolution to leave the European Union in favor of the United States or even Asia,” According to the position paper consulted by BFM Crypto.

Point by point, the cryptocurrency firm explains why regulation of the TFR seems unwarranted. For example, if a company realizes that money laundering is a problem, it “It represents, however, only a small portion of the illicit volume transmitted through the financial system (…) that only 0.15% of cryptocurrency transactions in 2021 have a criminal component,” Ledger says. Likewise, the blockchain can be a very effective tool for fighting crime“The European Union does not understand.”

Moreover, for a crypto company, the TFR will not respect the rights associated with the privacy of Europeans. With a total liability rate, exchanges and all crypto brokers (crypto asset service providers or CASPs) would be required to collect a lot of private information about any party involved in a transaction with an exchange, which Ledger considers disproportionate.

Ledger Recommendations

In this context, Ledger makes several recommendations to policy makers.

“We are instead proposing a solution that is more European-friendly, in accordance with international standards, that would exploit and build on Europe’s unique strengths,” confirms the document consulted by BFM Crypto.

Hence, the crypto community recommends not to do so “Never exceed the recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force (FATF)”, Intergovernmental organization against money laundering.

For example, FATF Recommendations 15 and 16 are driven to the extreme, such as anti-money laundering (anti-money laundering) and KYC (for “know your customer” or “know your customer”), a system for verifying the identity of a customer, Editor’s note) of the first euro.

Moreover, Ledger suggests “TFR Paraphrase” To better use the capabilities of blockchain analytics tools, and to conjure up alternatives to verify the identity of people who may be less intrusive and more secure. Finally, the company suggests “To invest in public/private partnerships to develop and be the first to market a self-sovereign identity solution to Europe.”

Male portfolios not hosted late

As a reminder, the objective of the European Regulation on Money Transfer (TFR) is to combat money laundering and terrorist financing. This regulation dates back to 2015 and reopened in 2021 to offer cryptocurrency. In July 2021, the Commission specifically conducted an impact assessment on the cryptocurrency sector, intended for the European Council and Parliament.

Ledger regrets that the mention of “non-hosted portfolio” does not appear in this impact analysis, and that it was first mentioned… in March 2022 in the European Parliament, i.e. during TFR negotiations. As a reminder, a non-hosted wallet (also called a non-hosted wallet) is a technology solution that allows you to keep access tokens for your cryptocurrencies. Ledger, Trezor, or Fireblocks companies fall into this category. The crypto company finally regrets the speed of negotiations over MiCa (or the market in crypto-assets) and TFR.

To our knowledge, it is not surprising that the TFR guidance, which dates back to 2015, does not necessarily mention the concept of “non-hosted wallet,” even though it does mention cryptocurrencies. In general, impact analysis, which aims to interrogate industry actors, focuses on a limited number of topics. Moreover, can the speed of negotiations be linked to the French presidency of the Council of the European Union, which ends in July? Question can be asked.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.