There is a distinct division around blockchain-related regulation in the United States, especially when it comes to state-level regulation. The spectrum ranges from conservative New York to progressive Ohio.<\/p>\n
In the U.S. today, two main positions from a regulatory standpoint exist. New York has taken a stricter, more controversial stance towards blockchain projects while states like Ohio have adopted much more encouraging policy.<\/p>\n
New York City is home to Wall Street, the financial capital of the world. It is not surprising that Bitcoin and cryptocurrencies, technologies with the goal of reversing the need for \u201cfinancial institutions serving as trusted third parties,\u201d have drawn distaste from some of the leadership on Wall Street.<\/p>\n
Jamie Dimon, the current CEO and Chairman at JPMorgan Chase, has called Bitcoin \u201ca fraud.\u201d<\/a> Another Wall Street powerhouse, the Bank of America, has accepted that crypto is a threat to their business, as stated in an annual report<\/a> to the SEC:<\/p>\n “In addition, the widespread adoption of new technologies\u2014including internet services, cryptocurrencies, and payment systems\u2014could require substantial expenditures to modify or adapt our existing products and services.\u201d<\/p><\/blockquote>\n This skepticism and worry have caught the eye of regulators. To that end, New York implemented the BitLicense<\/a>, a regulatory framework that aims to provide consumer protection for blockchain technology and cryptocurrencies. Erik Voorhees<\/a>, the CEO of cryptocurrency exchange ShapeShift, had a harsh reaction to Dimon\u2019s statements about Bitcoin and criticized<\/a> the ‘know your customer' (KYC) aspects of the BitLicense calling it an “aggregated surveillance list”.<\/p>\n My memory is failing, was it Bitcoin or was it JP Morgan that was bailed out by the government? https:\/\/t.co\/DHqFzr5UJN<\/a><\/p>\n — Erik Voorhees (@ErikVoorhees) September 12, 2017<\/a><\/p><\/blockquote>\n\n