[egorf]

They are basically blocking USD competitors. This makes a lot of sense, doesn't it?

Update: The SEC statement makes more sense than my original comment :)

[Yizahi]

People unhappy with USD can always use USDT, opportunistically printed in hundred million "dollars" equivalent per month by 3 semi-anonymous guys in non-extradition offshore and which was dropped like a hot potato by the only auditor company who even considered auditing this scam. There is only one small flaw in this plan - for some weird reason not many people are rushing to adopt this toilet paper "currency".

[pavlov]

Well, those billions of fake dollars are being used to buy Bitcoin, which props up its price, which attracts excited retail investors to buy Bitcoin — so in fact people are rushing to buy the USDT toilet paper, they just don't know it.

[wmf]

Or you could say they are blocking obvious pump-and-dumps.

[nikivi]

Libra is allowed to exist though. Or I suppose it doesn't compete with USD as it will be tied to fiat?

[egorf]

This is only my guess, but it should be so much easier to control and regulate Facebook's product rather than Telegram's, right?

[ivalm]

Libra is not selling rights to non-existent tokens. That’s why it’s not a security while TON is a security. No one banned TON, they just said that if you fundraise by sale of tokens then said tokens are securities. Which is a fairly straightforward truth.

[jokit]

It does from a short sighted, tyrannical, perspective.

[egorf]

It's not like I'm defending them. Just trying to understand the real reasoning behind this decision.

[lalaland1125]

I highly recommend that you read the original SEC complaint. It lays out the reasoning quite clearly.