The Binance settlement exposes the opaque treatment of banks and cryptocurrency companies, according to Omid Malekan, an adjunct professor at Columbia Business School.
The Binance settlement
Events surrounding the cryptocurrency exchange Binance recently generated a lot of discussion regarding the US government’s crackdown on cryptocurrency companies. Omid Malekan, a writer and adjunct professor at Columbia Business School, claims that the American Department of Justice’s strategy, in this case, is very different from conventional financial practices.
Malekan posted on X (formerly Twitter): “People who sincerely believe that crypto is some unique enabler of bad people doing bad things don’t understand how the rest of the financial system actually works.” He added that companies following best practices in the fight against money laundering still manage sizable sums of illegal funds. “But since someone completed the paperwork, everything is regarded as acceptable.”
Malekan further contended that if conventional firms were treated in comparable cases like Binance, a lot of Wall Streeters would end up behind bars.
“Had they been held to the Binance Standard, hundreds of managing directors would have been imprisoned, and there would have been less money available for lobbying or shareholder buybacks. The bankers, however, were wise enough to never question the game.”
Malekan feels that even after the criticism, the exchange was still “wrong for not being compliant and wrong to lie to its customers.” A recent multibillion-dollar settlement between the U.S. government and Binance and its co-founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao was reached over allegations that the exchange allowed people involved in illegal activity to transfer “stolen funds.” As part of the settlement, CZ stepped down as CEO.
Malekan also commended Binance for its recent efforts in promoting financial inclusion:
