In the wake of the turmoil in the banking sector, Johan Van Overtveldt, Member of the European Parliament and former Belgian Finance Minister, tweeted on Friday calling for a ban on crypto. Van Overtveldt is the economic spokesperson for a group of 64 EU legislators. He made the comment as the European Parliament prepares to vote on historic crypto licensing rules.
Another lesson to be learned from the current banking commotion. Enforce a strict ban on cryptocurrencies. Speculative poison and no economic or social added value. If a government bans drugs, it should also ban cryptos.
— Johan Van Overtveldt (@jvanovertveldt) March 17, 2023
Comparison crypto with drugs
In his tweet, he explains that he believes cryptocurrencies are speculative poison and have no economic or social added value. He also likens digital assets to drugs; he says that if a government bans drugs, crypto cannot be left behind.
Van Overtveldt represents the right wing European Conservatives and Reformers (ECR), the fifth largest political group in parliament, in the Committee on Economic and Monetary Affairs. He was Belgium’s finance minister from 2014 to 2018. The ECR says it is committed to “individual freedom, private property and limited government.
Parliament’s 705 legislators will vote next month on the Markets in Crypto Assets Regulation, which will provide a regulatory framework for wallet providers and crypto exchanges if they follow governance and consumer protection standards. Van Overtveldt led parliament’s work on a new law to ban securities-based trading distributed ledger technology to make possible. Furthermore, he has said that the blockchain has “great potential” to improve productivity.
EU fiercely against anonymous crypto wallets
A while ago you could read in the crypto news that the European Parliament had thrown the ban on own crypto wallets off the table. At first it seemed as if a blanket ban on anonymous crypto wallets was imminent, but a revised version of the bill describes that most self hosted wallets and wallet addresses will no longer be prohibited. In particular, policymakers want it to be clear who the addresses belong to.