Taming the DeFi Beast with a Regulatory Leash
BY: Serraya Quinn
As the FTX saga continues to unfold, with the crypto-exchange founder Sam Bankman-Fried being sentenced to 25 years in prison, the devastating impact of unchecked centralization in the crypto space has been laid bare. Billions in customer funds allegedly mishandled, misappropriated, or lost entirely — a searing reminder that the promise of decentralized finance (DeFi) remains largely unfulfilled.
DeFi was born out of the 2008 financial crisis, aiming to redistribute power away from central authorities and provide a transparent, trustless alternative to traditional finance. Built on blockchain technology, DeFi eliminates intermediaries, allowing users to directly access financial services through self-executing smart contracts. However, the revolutionary nature of DeFi also exposes it to unique risks that existing regulatory frameworks struggle to address.
Hacking incidents like the DAO hack in 2016, where $50 million worth of Ethereum was stolen due to a code vulnerability, and the prevalence of “rug pulls” — exit scams where developers abandon projects and disappear with investor funds — have highlighted the urgent need for effective oversight. Regulators initially grappled with understanding and classifying DeFi assets and transactions within traditional finance concepts, often relying on analogies with securities. However, the decentralized and global nature of DeFi poses challenges in assigning legal responsibility and enforcing rules on pseudonymous market participants scattered worldwide.
To address these challenges, a novel regulatory approach is proposed: the establishment of a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO) comprising stakeholders from agencies like the SEC, CFTC, and FinCEN, as well as legal experts, economists, and industry leaders. This “gDAO” would function as an on-chain regulatory arm, embedding compliance mechanisms directly into the blockchain network’s smart contracts. Imagine a preliminary smart contract that screens DeFi projects before they can execute transactions, automatically placing new protocols in a probationary phase, enforcing anti-money laundering and risk thresholds, and providing consumer notices about beta usage. Graduated projects would undergo stringent audits and trade volume limitations, ensuring consumer protection while fostering innovation. The gDAO’s governance would be endogenous to the blockchain ecosystem, keeping regulation “in the family” and mitigating resistance from the DeFi community towards government interference. Simultaneously, it would demonstrate a commitment to promoting innovation rather than stifling it. If core DeFi developers refuse to comply with the gDAO’s oversight, an alternative solution proposes assigning them fiduciary status. As the architects of the smart contracts that consumers entrust their assets to, core developers wield significant control and influence. Imposing fiduciary duties on them would ensure they act in the best interests of users, potentially deterring reckless behavior or exploitative practices.
The gDAO’s approach represents a pragmatic fusion of existing regulations and bespoke solutions tailored to the unique challenges of DeFi. By leveraging the transparency and automation of blockchain technology, it enables effective consumer protection while preserving the ethos of decentralization that fuels this groundbreaking financial paradigm. As DeFi continues its rapid expansion, innovative regulatory frameworks like the gDAO are crucial to ensuring its long-term sustainability and safeguarding the interests of all stakeholders. The future of finance is decentralized, and it’s time for regulation to catch up.
Key Sources:
David Yaffe-Bellany and J. Edward Moreno, Founder of FTX Given 25 Years in Crypto Scam, NY Times (Mar. 28, 2024) (last visited Apr. 1, 2024), https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/28/technology/sam-bankman-fried-sentenced.html.
Kevin Werbach, Cryptocurrency Symposium: Digital Asset Regulation: Peering Into the Past, Peering Into the Future, 64 Wm. & Mary L. Rev. 1251.
Klint Finley, A $50 Million Hack Just Showed That the DAO Was All Too Human, WIRED, (Jun. 18, 2016, 4:30 AM), https://www.wired.com/2016/06/50-million-hack-just-showed-dao-human/.
Carla L. Reyes, Article: (Un)Corporate Crypto-Governance, 88 Fordham L. Rev. 1875, 1886-87 (2020).
Angela Walch, Call Blockchain Developers What They Are: Fiduciaries, AMERICAN BANKER (Aug. 09, 2016, 12:00 PM), https://perma.cc/J5P3-ZS5U.