Jay Clayton Said, “Blockchain Will Always Be in Our Lives”

Jay Clayton, who stepped down as chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), said, "Blockchain will always be in our lives."

Jay Clayton, who stepped down after filing a unregistered securities lawsuit against Ripple, made some statements regarding cryptocurrency and blockchain technology. Touching on the Evergrande crisis, Clayton said that it should be carefully looked at what impact this crisis will have on non-Chinese investors, but that it is not exactly like the Lehman Brothers crisis. Speaking to CNBC, Jay Clayton's statements were as follows:

"Need to Look at the Role of the Product"

I also wrote on Wall Street about these issues a few months ago. To give a definition to cryptocurrencies from the regulatory framework, you need to look at what each product does. Of course, you may not find a complete definition for assets such as Bitcoin. However, if you see it as an investment partnership, then you should regulate it within the framework of those rules. It is not easy to give a single answer here.

"This Technology Will Always Be In Our Lives"

Jay Clayton, who was also asked whether Bitcoin can be stopped after this minute, did not make a detailed comment on the largest cryptocurrency, but stated that it would be more accurate to make a broader comment: “I specifically think we need to step back from assets and look at the broader picture. It would be better if we look at it from a technology perspective. In my personal opinion, this technology will remain in our lives. It will also enter the current markets. It will also take place in new markets that will be formed in the coming years. Blockchain rather than cryptocurrencies. It would be better if we use the terms distributed ledger technology and distributed ledger technology. This technology will also create serious opportunities for investments. However, which cryptocurrencies will continue to exist, which will disappear, what adjective should be given to each, these are issues that require more micro-interpretation..."