Academic and monetary historian Franklin Noll asserts that cryptocurrencies can be both securities and money. When it comes to the history of U.S. currency, Noel argues that, in fact, being both a currency and a security is not contradictory.
‘Notorious’ Continental Dollar Coin
American monetary historian Franklin Noll asserts that the U.S. dollar’s history over the years shows that being a currency and a security are not contradictory, and that cryptocurrencies can be both.
Noll’s assertion comes at a time when the debate over the status of cryptocurrencies remains contentious and unresolved.For example, recent Bitcoin.com news report Comments on the topic from current SEC Chairman Gary Gensler.
However, in a short time piece Noel recently published an article on his blog where he first used Continental Yuan coins to support his claim. According to historians, these now “infamous” coins were an ultimately unsuccessful attempt to “finance the American Revolution by printing money.”
In addition to serving as the currency to fund the war, the Continental Dollar Coin was also intended to act as a security. Noel explained:
Farley Grubb [a professor in economics and history] Zeng pointed out that mainland bonds are basically zero-coupon bonds issued in small denominations. However, the plan failed when Congress changed the original repayment terms, rendering the notes worthless.
In addition to Continental Yuan, Noel also pointed out Interest-bearing notes This is actually “a set of paper money emissions associated with the U.S. Treasury during the Civil War.”
According to Noll, the notes were designed to “serve as both currency and securities.” Unlike the continental dollar coin, which ultimately failed, however, the interest-bearing note was a success.
“Interest-bearing notes are created both as money and as securities. These notes are issued in denominations as low as $10 and pay 5% interest. This interest will be paid when the notes mature and are turned over to the Treasury. It was successful and got a commitment from the U.S. Treasury,” Noel explained.
Meanwhile, when asked how long it will take for regulators to recognize the idea that crypto can be both a security and a currency, Noel told Bitcoin.com News that it could take some time. “Regulators don’t see it that way,” he argues. To them, something is either a security that the SEC should regulate, or a form of money that the U.S. Treasury or other agencies must regulate.
“I think it will take some time for regulators to move to a new paradigm (or really, back to an old paradigm not seen in a century) where the categories of payment methods are different or merged. I think we’ve been talking for at least 5 years ,” he concluded.
Do you agree with Noll’s argument that crypto can be both a security and a currency? Let us know what you think in the comments section below.
Image Source: Shutterstock, Pixabay, Wiki Commons
Disclaimer: This article is for reference only. It is not a direct offer or an invitation to buy or sell, nor is it a recommendation or endorsement of any product, service or company. Bitcoin Network Does not provide investment, tax, legal or accounting advice. Neither the company nor the author is responsible, directly or indirectly, for any damage or loss caused or alleged to be caused by or in connection with the use of or reliance on any content, goods or services mentioned herein.