• English
  • 简体中文
  • 繁體中文
  • Tiếng Việt
  • ไทย
  • Indonesia
Subscribe
Real-time News
The Hang Seng Index in Hong Kong opened at 23,865.64 points, down 26.68 points, or 0.11%, on July 10 (Thursday); the Hang Seng Technology Index opened at 5,218.31 points, down 13.68 points, or 0.26%, on July 10 (Thursday); the CSI 300 Index opened at 8,588.74 points, down 8.53 points, or 0.1%, on July 10 (Thursday); the H-share Index opened at 4,110.46 points, up 1.88 points, or 0.05%, on July 10 (Thursday).Hang Seng Index futures opened down 0.07% at 23,866 points, 26 points below the spot price.Japans 20-year government bond yield fell 2.0 basis points to 2.490%.South Koreas central bank decided the interest rate at 2.5% on July 10, in line with expectations of 2.50% and the previous value of 2.50%.On July 10, an important panel in the U.S. Senate debated proposed digital asset regulation, with Republicans calling for a moderate approach and Democrats warning of potential loopholes and conflicts of interest. "Our job is to set clear, loose guardrails to protect investors, stop fraud, and allow responsible innovation to flourish," said Tim Scott, chairman of the Senate Banking Committee. He noted that legislation should clearly define which tokens are securities and ensure appropriate protection from illegal financing. Republican Senator Hagerty and others released market structure principles last month, calling for a clear definition of the legal status and regulatory agencies of digital assets. The plan is largely in line with the CLARITY Act proposed by the House Committee in June. Hagerty said he was not worried about losing bipartisan support for market structure legislation and predicted that Democrats who support stablecoin legislation would begin to act.

Lawsuit accuses troubled crypto lender Celsius Network of fraud

Skylar Shaw

Jul 08, 2022 14:54

微信截图_20220708144808.png


On Thursday, a former investment manager at Celsius Network filed a lawsuit against the cryptocurrency lender, alleging that it had frozen client funds and had rigged the price of its own cryptocurrency token using user contributions.


According to the lawsuit, Celsius engaged in "gross mishandling of client deposits" in order to enrich itself and deceived plaintiff KeyFi Inc, controlled by former manager Jason Stone, into delivering services worth millions of dollars while refusing to pay for them.


The complaint was filed in Manhattan's New York state court and demands both specific compensation and punitive damages; Celsius has not yet responded.


Stone's charges come after Celsius decided on June 12 to halt transfers and withdrawals for its 1.7 million clients due to "extreme" market circumstances.


Later, the Hoboken, New Jersey-based business recruited consultants to discuss a potential debt restructure that would include declaring bankruptcy.


While the cryptocurrency hedge fund went into liquidation late last month, the crypto lender Voyager Digital Ltd filed for bankruptcy protection this week.


Celsius guaranteed retail consumers disproportionate returns, up to 19% yearly.


However, Stone said that Celsius had trouble paying investors because it neglected to hedge its bets, leading to "severe" losses when the value of several currencies changed.


He also claimed that Celsius had a $100 million to $200 million hole in its records that it "could not completely explain or rectify" because certain deposits were recorded on a U.S. dollar basis even though clients were paid in bitcoin or other digital currencies.


The case filed on Thursday claims that Stone produced $838 million in profit for Celsius and KeyFi before expenses and overhead from August 2020 to March 2021 while mostly operating without a formal agreement, with KeyFi being entitled to 20% of net profit.


When it became apparent that the hedging difficulties "may be financially ruinous" for Celsius and harm KeyFi's image, Stone claims he ended the connection in March 2021. However, Stone claims that Celsius has refused to accept his resignation.


KeyFi Inc. v. Celsius Network Ltd. et al., New York State Supreme Court, New York County, is the name of the case.