Consensys Faces SEC Probe for Alleged Unlicensed Brokerage via MetaMask

V. CONSENSYS WAS REQUIRED TO, BUT DID NOT, REGISTER AS A BROKER WITH RESPECT TO METAMASK SWAPS.

323. As fully set forth in the preceding paragraphs, Consensys, through MetaMask Swaps, used the means and instrumentalities of interstate commerce to engage in the business of effecting transactions in securities for the account of others by, for example, soliciting potential investors in crypto asset securities, holding itself out as a place to buy and sell crypto assets (including crypto asset securities), providing investment advice by highlighting the “best” prices or “best” value, and otherwise facilitating trading in crypto asset securities by creating customer wallets (i.e., “accounts”), routing customer orders, handling customer crypto asset securities through Consensys-operated smart contract addresses, facilitating order execution by submitting blockchain transactions to a Consensys node, and receiving transaction-based compensation for doing so. Consensys was herefore required to register with the SEC as a broker or operate pursuant to an exemption or exception but did not do so.