Hardly 10 days after rejecting it for its failure to ‘prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices’, the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) wants to take a second look at the Bitwise Bitcoin Exchange-Traded Fund (ETF) proposal.
According to reports, the SEC is now reviewing its order issued on October 9 pertaining to the rejected proposal. The proposal was filed by NYSE Arca for the Bitwise Bitcoin ETF Trust. Meanwhile, the SEC is also evaluating a proposed rule change for a different kind of Bitcoin ETF.
In this regard, the Commission has sent a letter to Intercontinental Exchange (ICE), the parent company of the NYSE, on October 15, concerning its recent order disapproving NYSE Arca’s proposal to list and trade shares of the Bitwise Bitcoin ETF Trust. The proposal was rejected on October 9.
“This letter is to notify you that, pursuant to Rule 431 of the Commission’s Rules of Practice, 17 CFR 201.431, the Commission will review the delegated action,” the SEC’s letter to ICE explained. “The Office of the Secretary will notify you of any pertinent action taken by the Commission.”
The Commission emphasized that its disapproval “does not rest on an evaluation of whether Bitcoin, or blockchain technology more generally, has utility or value as an innovation or an investment.” This is also not the first time the SEC has taken this kind of action.
In August of last year, the Commission did the same with three orders for nine Bitcoin ETFs. Besides reviewing the order disapproving the proposal for the Bitwise Bitcoin ETF Trust, the SEC is currently evaluating another proposed rule change filed by NYSE Arca. The exchange is seeking to list and trade shares of the United States Bitcoin and Treasury Investment Trust.
On January 28 this year, the NYSE Arca Inc. had originally filed a proposed rule change to list and trade shares of the Bitwise Bitcoin ETF Trust with the Commission. But on October 9, the SEC issued an order disapproving the high-profile Bitcoin ETF.
While rejecting the proposal, the Commission clarified that the proposal was disapproved because the NYSE Arca exchange has not shown that its proposal is consistent with “the requirements of Exchange Act Section 6(b)(5), and, in particular, the requirement that the rules of a national securities exchange be ‘designed to prevent fraudulent and manipulative acts and practices.”