The cryptocurrency community reacted with a mix of disbelief and amusement after reality star Kim Kardashian was fined for promoting the EthereumMax (EMAX) cryptocurrency..
The United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) fined Kardashian USD 1.26 million on October 3, for “promoting on social networks” the EMAX cryptocurrency without disclosing that he was paid $250,000 to post about her.
Kardashian has neither admitted nor denied the SEC allegations, but has settled the charges and agreed not to promote any crypto assets until 2025..
The chairman of the SEC, Gary Gensler tweeted that the fine was a reminder that celebrity endorsement of investment opportunities does not “mean that those investment products are suitable for all investors.”.
Today @SECGovwe charged Kim Kardashian for unlawfully touting a crypto security.
This case is a reminder that, when celebrities / influencers endorse investment opps, including crypto asset securities, it doesn’t mean those investment products are right for all investors.
— Gary Gensler (@GaryGensler) October 3, 2022
Today @SECGov, we indict Kim Kardashian for illegally promoting a cryptocurrency security. This case is a reminder that when celebrities/influencers endorse investment opportunities, including crypto asset securities, it does not mean that those investment products are suitable for all investors.
Following Gensler’s tweet, the online cryptocurrency community expressed their thoughts on the fine, with some criticizing the SEC for its inconsistent enforcement decisions.
The Economist Peter Schiff, known for his anti-bitcoin (BTC) stance, pointed out what he perceived as unfair targeting by Kardashian, as the SEC has not fined MicroStrategy co-founder Michael Saylor, who he believes has “more to gain from pumping cryptocurrencies”.
The SEC is fining @KimKardashian $1.2 million for pumping #crypto. What about the real pumpers? @Saylor had much more to gain pumping crypto than Kim. Or @CNBC paid millions for ads by crypto companies, then pumping #bitcoin non-stop while providing industry pumpers with airtime?
— Peter Schiff (@PeterSchiff) October 3, 2022
The SEC is fining @KimKardashian $1.2 million for pumping a cryptocurrency. What about the real pumpers? @Saylor had a lot more to gain from pumping crypto than Kim did. Or did @CNBC pay millions for ads from cryptocurrency companies, then pump bitcoin nonstop, while providing industry pumpers with airtime?
Saylor answered; He said that bitcoin is not a security, but a commodity, and its promotion would be “similar to the promotion of steel… or granite.” and the coin’s open protocol offers “highway-like utilitarian beliefs.”
Crypto personality and author Layah Heilpern shared that he believed that “the SEC has more important matters closer to home that it should probably be focusing on…”, likely inferring the widespread belief in the community that certain US politicians have used insider information to make considerable profits.
The SEC will go after Kim Kardashian for shilling a crypto but not Nancy Pelosi for insider trading her way to a hundred million dollars https://t.co/i0bZKjaxjJ
— Dr. Parik Patel, BA, CFA, ACCA Esq. (@ParikPatelCFA) October 3, 2022
The SEC will go after Kim Kardashian for selling a cryptocurrency, but not Nancy Pelosi for using inside information to get a hundred million dollars https://t.co/i0bZKjaxjJ
The pseudonymous developer 0xBender pointed to a contrast between the SEC’s heavy-handed treatment of celebrity cryptocurrency promotions, while crypto-centric influencers “have been here promoting crap for 0.2 ETH a tweet.”.
The SEC is charging Kim Kardashian with unlawfully promoting a crypto security while influencers have been out here shilling you garbage for 0.2 ETH a tweet
— bender (@0xBender) October 3, 2022
The SEC accuses Kim Kardashian of illegally promoting a crypto security while influencers have been around here promoting crap for 0.2 ETH a tweet.
Others, such as former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti, said that influencers thinking of backing cryptocurrencies should “take note” as the regulator is showing it will “aggressively go after enforcement actions”, and those who promote cryptocurrencies without heeding the laws “will need to find a good lawyer”.
Kim Kardashian presented a very tempting target for the SEC.
Because of this case, millions of people who didn’t know much about the SEC now know about it.
As an aspiring lawyer, she had every incentive to cooperate. Other celebrity crypto endorsers should take note. https://t.co/3mvMNQOxvg
– Renato Mariotti (@renato_mariotti) October 3, 2022
Kim Kardashian presented a very tempting target for the SEC. Because of this case, millions of people who didn’t know much about the SEC now do. As an aspiring lawyer, she had every incentive to cooperate. Other celebrities who support cryptocurrencies should take note. https://t.co/3mvMNQOxvg
Meanwhile, Ethereum educator and investor Anthony Sassano told his followers that he believes the SEC went after Kardashian because it creates the illusion that the regulator is “doing something” about crypto scams, and suggested that it should have actually gone after the creators of EMAX..
They went after Kim Kardashian because she makes a good headline and it shows the public that the SEC is “doing something” about crypto scams
In reality, the fine she paid is dust to her, the creators of Ethereum Max haven’t been fined (yet?), and the victims are all still rekt
— sassal.eth (@sassal0x) October 3, 2022
They went after Kim Kardashian because it makes a good headline and shows the public that the SEC is “doing something” about crypto scams. Actually, the fine she paid is dust for her, the creators of Ethereum Max have not been fined (yet?), and the victims are all still rekt.
Nevertheless, some saw the lighter side of investing in a tumultuous and highly speculative crypto token; journalist Tyler Conway said the star “got the full crypto experience” by losing more money than he was paid.
The self-styled hacker and creator of technological content Marcus Hutchins said that Kardashian “would have gotten better returns” on EthereumMax, as it is down 97% since his post, compared to the -80% he got back from the promotion..
Kim Kardashian got paid $250k to promote Ethereum Max then lost $1.3m of that to an SEC fine. She would have gotten better returns just investing in Ethereum MAX, which is down 97% since her post from her.
— Marcus Hutchins (@MalwareTechBlog) October 3, 2022
Kim Kardashian received $250,000 to promote Ethereum Max and later lost $1.3 million to an SEC fine. She would have gotten better returns just by investing in Ethereum MAX, which is down 97% since its publication.
Clarification: The information and/or opinions expressed in this article do not necessarily represent the views or editorial line of Cointelegraph. The information set forth herein should not be taken as financial advice or investment recommendation. All investment and commercial movement involve risks and it is the responsibility of each person to do their due research before making an investment decision.
Keep reading:
Investments in crypto assets are not regulated. They may not be suitable for retail investors and the full amount invested may be lost. The services or products offered are not aimed at or accessible to investors in Spain.