Unicoin vs SEC: The $100M Comedy of Errors 😂⚔️

by

In a tale that reads like a Kafkaesque farce, crypto investment platform Unicoin has finally emerged from the shadows to deliver a scathing rebuttal to the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) fraud lawsuit. Three months of silence? Worth it, apparently. Unicoin accuses the SEC of distorting its regulatory filings, turning routine optimism into a Shakespearean tragedy of deceit.

Addressing a New York federal judge on Wednesday, Unicoin declared the SEC’s lawsuit should be tossed out faster than stale bread. Why? Because, according to Unicoin, the SEC “plucks snippets of communications and distorts their meaning and context; treats routine financial projection and optimism as fraud; and ignores Unicoin’s sober warnings about risk.” 🍞🎭

But wait, there’s more! Unicoin claims the SEC has gone full pretzel logic, twisting the company’s own disclosures in its SEC filings and then serving them up as evidence of deception. “Most bizarrely,” they quip, as if this were some kind of avant-garde performance art. Bravo, SEC. Bravo. 👏🎨

This saga began in May when the SEC sued Unicoin, its CEO Alex Konanykhin, board member Silvina Moschini, and former investment chief Alex Dominguez. The charge? Allegedly raising $100 million by misleading investors about certificates tied to Unicoin tokens and stock. Ah yes, because nothing screams “fraud” like blockchain-based assets. 🤑🔗

SEC Needs Glasses-and Higher Standards of Proof

Unicoin fired back with gusto, arguing that the SEC stitched together its case like a poorly made quilt. Securities fraud, they reminded the court, requires more than circumstantial evidence and creative semantics. “It requires a false statement, made with scienter, that reasonable investors would have relied on,” they wrote. Translation: You can’t sue us for saying things might work out someday. 🧵🪡

Unicoin also slammed the SEC’s complaint as a “shotgun pleading”-a legal term for throwing spaghetti at the wall to see what sticks. No motive? Check. Circumstantial evidence? Double check. Mischaracterized statements? Triple check. It seems the SEC is auditioning for a role in a slapstick comedy rather than a courtroom drama. 🍝💥

SEC Says Unicoin Misled Investors About Tokens and Certificates

The SEC accused Unicoin of grandiose claims, alleging the company promised billions in real-world asset backing for its upcoming token and rights certificates. Real estate! Pre-IPO equity! The works! Except, according to the SEC, those assets were worth peanuts compared to what was advertised. 🥜🏢

Even better, the SEC claimed Unicoin sold over $3 billion in rights certificates when the actual figure was closer to $110 million. And let’s not forget the pièce de résistance: falsely advertising the tokens and certificates as SEC-registered. Oh, the irony. 🎭📉

Unicoin Strikes Back: ‘Not Our Fault You Can’t Read!’

In its defense, Unicoin argued that the SEC cherry-picked statements “taken wholly out of context.” Executives, they insisted, said the company-not the tokens-was asset-backed. As for the tokens themselves? They hadn’t even been created yet! How do you hold someone accountable for something that doesn’t exist? Science fiction writers, take note. 🚀📚

Unicoin also pointed out that the SEC conflated deal values with property values in its real estate transactions. Some deals, they noted, were still pending closure-a detail allegedly disclosed to investors. Alas, nuance is often lost in translation, especially when the translator is wielding a lawsuit. 🏠⏳

To cap it all off, Unicoin asked the court to dismiss the SEC’s lawsuit with prejudice, effectively slamming the door shut on any chance of a sequel. One can only hope this legal soap opera ends with both parties sitting down for tea and crumpets instead of another round of litigation. 🫖🍰

Read More

2025-08-29 09:42