Share this article
E-Gold Claims US Officials Buried Key Report in 2008 Landmark Crypto Ruling
A court filing alleges federal government suppression of an OFR review led to crypto businesses being defined as money transmitters.
By Paddy Baker
Updated Sep 14, 2021, 8:59 a.m. Published Jul 3, 2020, 11:30 a.m.

A defunct digital currency project that was a precursor to bitcoin has claimed the U.S. government suppressed crucial evidence in a 2008 landmark case that has since shaped the cryptocurrency industry.
- E-Gold's former directors filed a petition Tuesday for a writ of coram nobis – in which the court changes the original judgment upon discovery of a fundamental error – at the District of Columbia court.
- Founded in 1996, E-Gold allowed users to trade digital units backed by precious metals. At its peak, the company held around $85 million in gold.
- The U.S. government charged E-Gold with being an unlicensed money transmitter in 2007 and the project's directors pleaded guilty in 2008.
- The ex-directors now claim in court the federal government unlawfully concealed a 2006 review from Florida's Office for Financial Regulation (OFR) so it "could make an example" of E-Gold.
- Per the filing, the OFR review said E-Gold did not count as a money transmitter because the gold-based asset was closer to a commodity than a fiat currency under state law.
- E-Gold's former directors claim the court's judgment would have been substantially different had they been allowed access to the OFR review
- The E-Gold case effectively extended the definition of "money transmitter" in the U.S. to include any system that stored and transferred value.
- Many crypto businesses subsequently have had to be regulated as money transmitters in individual states if they want to operate legally in the U.S.
See the full filing below:
See also: Lessons From the First Digital Gold Boom
More For You
More For You
Crypto group counters Wall Street bankers with its own stablecoin principles for bill

After the bankers shared a document at the White House demanding a total ban on stablecoin yield, the crypto side answers that it needs some stablecoin rewards.
What to know:
- The U.S. Senate's crypto market structure bill has been waylaid by a dispute over something that's not related to market structure: yield on stablecoins.
- The Digital Chamber is offering a response to a position paper circulated earlier this week by bankers who oppose stablecoin yield.
- The crypto group's own principles documents argues that certain rewards are needed on stablecoin acvitity, but that the industry doesn't need to pursue products that directly threaten bank deposits business.
Top Stories












