FTX: John Jay Ray files second interim report, sues Daniel Friedberg

  • By Amy Castor and David Gerard

Me: [turning to guy at gas station] so the polycule was mostly in the dark about the fraud. SBF had back door access
Guy: [pulling out taser from under seat] is that right

Ed Zitron

“Attorney-1” was a bad boy

John Jay Ray III, the CEO of FTX in bankruptcy, has released a second interim report detailing how FTX skirted bank secrecy laws and commingled funds — and how an FTX lawyer, “Attorney-1,” served as Sam Bankman-Fried’s fix-it and hatchet man. [Report, PDF]

(We covered the first interim report, which came out in April, here.)  

“Attorney-1” is very obviously Daniel Friedberg, who was FTX’s compliance officer and Alameda’s general counsel. A day after Ray released the interim report, FTX filed suit against Friedberg, alleging malfeasance in the course of his duties. The complaint details many of the same incidents in the report. [WSJ; redacted complaint, PDF]

In 2008, Friedberg was a colleague of Stuart Hoegner at Ultimate Bet, where the pair helped cover up a multi-million-dollar scandal in which the site cheated its players. Hoegner now works for Tether, a dubious stablecoin issuer

SBF hiring Friedberg should have been the first clue that FTX.com was a massive fraud. 

Friedberg resigned around the time the FTX Group filed for bankruptcy. Weeks later, he met with the FBI, the DOJ, and the SEC and told them he wanted to cooperate with any investigations.

There’s an interesting line in the interim report:

The Debtors have identified on Attorney-1’s hard drive a final copy of the false written testimony that Bankman-Fried provided to Congress.

FTX has access to the hard drive from Friedberg’s computer. Did Friedberg just leave the evidence behind when he quit FTX? Or did he willingly hand over his laptop to FBI agents? This hard drive seems to have had all sorts of interesting documents on it.

Friedberg hasn’t been charged with any crimes as yet — but based on Ray’s report and the ensuing lawsuit, we wouldn’t be surprised if there’s a sealed indictment out there waiting for him.

Following the money

FTX owes $8.7 billion in customer funds — over $6.4 billion of which is cash and stablecoins. According to Ray, Friedberg lent a helping hand when FTX executives “used commingled customer and corporate funds for speculative trading, venture investments, and the purchase of luxury properties, as well as for political and other donations designed to enhance their own power and influence.”

Ray details what he found about various FTX accounts and the flows of cash in and out of them. Tracking money flows was “extraordinarily challenging”:

… from the inception of the FTX.com exchange, the FTX Group commingled customer deposits and corporate funds, and misused them with abandon … Commingling and misuse occurred at their direction, and by their design.

Ray and his team have recovered $7 billion in “liquid assets” so far, which is astounding — though we’re not sure how liquid the crypto component of that will be in practice, or how much is unsaleable FTT tokens.

The report does not include FTX in Japan, Cyprus, or Singapore — areas where funds were properly segregated by law. It also does not address FTX.US, which Ray says is still under investigation. 

No, no, it’s research 

FTX lied to banks — a lot. Alameda Research had “research” in its name so that it could get bank accounts without immediately being flagged for enhanced due diligence as a money services business. FTX couldn’t get banking, so they used Alameda bank accounts to receive customer cash, right from the start. 

But banks started asking inconvenient questions. When “Bank-1” — likely either Signature or Silvergate — asked why FTX was sending money to Alameda, an Alameda employee told them that “customers occasionally confuse FTX and Alameda” but that all wires through the account were to settle trades with Alameda.

This was false. In just 2020, one of Alameda’s accounts received more than $250 million in deposits from FTX customers and more than $4 billion from other Alameda accounts that were funded in part by customer deposits, says the report.

When banks started rejecting wires to Alameda accounts, FTX set up North Dimension so it could continue to funnel money to FTX. Friedberg and SBF told “Bank-1” that North Dimension was a crypto trading firm with substantial operations. In fact, it was an empty shell with no employees or operations.

Friedberg also engaged his old law firm to create a fake corporate register for North Dimension for the bank: “Specifically, after Bank-1 asked for a copy of the register, Attorney-1 directed a law firm to create a register.”

Time travel by document

In 2021, FTX Trading Ltd was planning to go public. As part of the paperwork for that, it needed an audited financial statement.

The problem was that from April 2019 when FTX.com first launched until the end of August 2020, FTX.com customers had been sending cash deposits to Alameda bank accounts. FTX needed to cover up the fact that they were just using Alameda to move customer and company funds around without any agreement to do so.

So in January 2021, Friedberg had his old law firm draft a “cash management agreement” to explain why Alameda held FTX cash. Friedberg created from this a fake “Payment Agent Agreement.”

FTX usually signed documents with DocuSign to provide an electronic record. In this case, to avoid a DocuSign timestamp, SBF wet-signed the document on behalf of Alameda and FTX on April 16, 2021 — backdated to 2019 “for the sole purpose of providing it to an external auditor.”

How did Ray’s team know the document was backdated? They found the original document file on Friedberg’s hard drive:

While metadata reflects that Attorney-1 created the Payment Agent Agreement on April 12, 2021, and that the executed version was last modified on April 16, 2021, the agreement purports to have an “Effective Date” of June 1, 2019 —nearly two years earlier.

The IPO never happened — but the fake document did help the FTX companies get more funding from “potential investors in connection with its $400 million Series C financing that closed in January 2022.”

Sam the philanthropist

SBF was famous for his Effective Altruism. He used FTX funds by preference:

The Debtors have been able to identify certain transactions that appear clearly to have been funded in part with commingled customer deposits. These include political and “charitable” donations, venture investments and acquisitions, and the purchase of luxury real estate for senior FTX Group employees in the Bahamas.

Sam’s charitable donations got a bit esoteric. The FTX Foundation gave one guy $300,000 to “Write a book about how to figure out what humans’ utility function is” — a question that LessWrong rationalist philosophy needs to answer so as to construct the perfect superintelligence to rule over us all. And that hopefully won’t turn out to be Roko’s basilisk. [LessWrong, PDF, 2004]

The Foundation gave someone else $400,000 to make YouTube videos to promote LessWrong rationalism and Effective Altruism.

Closer to home, the Foundation gave $20 million to the Guarding Against Pandemics PAC, which was run by Sam’s younger brother Gabe Bankman-Fried.

FTX sues Friedberg

Friedberg’s malfeasance was egregious enough that FTX  is suing him for “damages caused by breaches of fiduciary duties, legal malpractice, and other wrongdoing, and to recover fraudulent transfers.” 

The suit also alleges Friedberg paid off whistleblowers rather than deal with the compliance issues they raised.

Friedberg worked at FTX from 2017 until its collapse in 2022, the last 22 months of that as general counsel at Alameda and chief compliance officer at FTX. Joe Bankman, SBF’s father, pushed Sam to hire Friedberg and keep him “in the loop … so we have one person on top of everything.”

FTX paid Friedberg millions of dollars in salary and bonuses, and tens of millions in crypto — a $300,000 salary at FTX.US, a $1.4 million signing bonus, an 8% equity stake in FTX.US, and a $3 million payment from Alameda. 

Plaintiffs want compensatory damages to be determined at trial, disgorgement of all of Friedberg’s compensation including the cryptos, punitive damages, and attorney’s fees.

Chief noncompliance officer

Friedberg’s putative job as chief compliance officer was to make sure the proper checks and balances were in place to prevent fraud, commingling of funds, and other wrongdoings. Per the complaint, he didn’t do any of that. Instead, “Friedberg actively participated in and facilitated such misconduct.”

Money was funneled to FTX insiders and booked as “personal loans” — which were never repaid, and which there was never any serious discussion of paying — “despite Friedberg’s false statement to the outside accountants that interest was paid quarterly on the loans.”  Friedberg was involved in more than $2 billion in such “loans.”

Friedberg also encouraged the use of Signal for corporate messaging, preferably set to make messages disappear.

Ray is still appalled at how bad FTX’s accounting was:

Those entities that did produce financial statements used QuickBooks, Google documents, Slack communications, Excel spreadsheets, and other inadequate means for measuring the level of assets and liabilities held by the FTX Group. Entries in QuickBooks were often made months after transactions occurred, rendering real-time financial reporting and risk management impossible.

Hush money

Friedberg served as SBF’s fixer. He paid off whistleblowers and “retained” whistleblowers’ attorneys — that is, he paid them off too. 

In November 2019, FTX and Alameda were hit with a class action lawsuit that accused the companies and their executives of racketeering and market manipulation. [Docket; Decrypt, 2019]

The lawsuit doesn’t name “Plaintiff’s Attorney-1” — but this is clearly Pavel Pogodin, who set up Bitcoin Manipulation Abatement for the sole purpose of filing crypto class actions.

Alameda said at the time: “The troll has no evidence of any wrongdoing, and will not further discover any — because there was no wrongdoing to discover evidence of.” [Medium, 2019]

Nevertheless, Friedberg took the suit seriously enough that he paid Pogodin off. (The details are redacted.) The suit was dismissed in December 2019.

As a California Bar member of flawless repute, Pogodin is happy to be paid not to do anything. He sent a letter in January 2022 threatening further possible action against FTX. Friedberg offered him “$1.6 million and $50,000 paid on a monthly basis.”

In sum, Friedberg arranged for the FTX Group to pay Plaintiffs’ Attorney-1 $3,320,000 through July 2022. Upon information and belief, Plaintiffs’ Attorney-1 provided no actual legal services to the FTX Group after signing the engagement letter.

An FTX.US employee on a $200,000 salary was fired after less than two months. She sent a demand letter in December 2021 claiming that “Alameda [was] nothing more than an extension of FTX, used to bolster investor confidence in FTX projects, and in turn drive up the prices of projects FTX had developed or invested in itself” and let employees insider-trade.

Friedberg gave this employee an “extraordinary settlement” (redacted in the filing) — and made a $12 million deal to retain Whistleblower-1’s attorney. Their only work for FTX was a three-page memo.

In early 2022, an attorney working at FTX for less than three months discovered that Alameda owned North Dimension. He flagged to Friedberg that North Dimension accounts were being used to fund FTX customer withdrawals and that Alameda didn’t have the proper money transmitter licenses.

Friedberg promptly fired him. The complaint details how the attorney was paid a large (redacted) severance package.

Other FTX news

John Ray’s team has so far racked up $200 million in fees — and the fee examiner thinks this is quite reasonable. Gotta pay the undertaker: [Bloomberg; summary report, PDF

Without question, the fees incurred to date are remarkable, but so is the professionals’ performance. The Fee Examiner has been struck by the creativity, professionalism, and personal sacrifice of the Retained Professionals who sprung into action in November to begin transforming a smoldering heap of wreckage into a functioning Chapter 11 debtor-in-possession.

Over in the criminal case, SBF moved to dismiss 10 of the 13 charges against him. Judge Lewis Kaplan has told SBF to get knotted: “The Court has considered all of the arguments of the parties. To the extent not addressed herein, the arguments are either moot or without merit.” [Doc 136, PDF; Doc 148, PDF; Doc 149, PDF; NYT; Doc 167, PDF

Sam wants to blame his troubles on Fenwick & West, the law firm used by FTX and Alameda, who apparently told him that all the hamfistedly obvious crimes he did were all totally legal. The DoJ and FTX objected, and Judge Kaplan has again told Sam to get knotted: “Neither Fenwick nor the FTX Debtors are part of the ‘prosecution team,’ and the government has no obligation to produce materials that are not within its possession, custody, or control.” [Bloomberg; Doc 150, PDF; Doc 151, PDF; Doc 151-1, PDF; Doc 156, PDF; Doc 159, PDF; Doc 166, PDF]

Over at Lightcone, who build and run LessWrong and the Effective Altruism Forum: “Funding is quite tight since the collapse of FTX.” They’re asking the users for $3 million to $6 million over the next year. [LessWrong]

Crypto collapse: New Sam Bankman-Fried charge, Binance fallout, SEC sues exchange over crypto securities, how Signature died

  • By Amy Castor and David Gerard

“who needs an examiner when you can just hand sam an empty sheet of paper and wait”

— haveblue

Sam is a growing boy, he needs his crimes

A new superseding indictment against FTX founder Sam Bankman-Fried alleges that he paid Chinese officials $40 million in crypto in a bribe to unfreeze $1 billion in crypto on Alameda — which would violate the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act. Sam now faces 13 criminal counts. [Superseding indictment, PDF]

On Thursday, March 30, Sam took a trip to New York and pleaded not guilty to his latest five charges. He had to battle his way through a gaggle of reporters just to get in the door. At least it got him out of the house. [Twitter; YouTube; NYT]

In early 2021, China froze $1 billion of cryptos in various Alameda accounts on two of the country’s biggest crypto exchanges (which aren’t named in the indictment). Bankman-Fried “understood that the Accounts had been frozen as part of an ongoing investigation of a particular Alameda trading counterparty.” A bribe was sent from Alameda to a private blockchain address in November 2021. The accounts were unfrozen shortly after, and Alameda got its cryptos back.

Somehow, Daniel Friedberg, FTX’s chief counsel at the time knew nothing of this. Friedberg said in an affidavit dated March 19, 2021, when the FTX Arena naming rights deal was going through, that FTX and its affiliated companies “do not have any ownership or contracts or any other obligations with respect to any governmental agency of the People’s Republic of China, or any governmental agents or political persons.” [Miami-Dade Legislative Item, PDF, p. 54]

Sam will be kept on a very short leash while he’s out on bail. Sam gets a non-smartphone that only does voice and SMS — no internet access — and a locked-down laptop configured to access only certain websites. He can work with his lawyers, order food from DoorDash, and keep up with the sportsball. YouTube is also on the list, so we’re looking forward to the 10-hour video blogs detailing crimes hitherto unknown to humanity. [Order, PDF]

Sam’s father, Joseph Bankman, is paying his son’s lawyer fees with over $10 million that Sam borrowed from Alameda and gave to his father as a present in 2021. We wonder if John Jay Ray is going to come calling to claw this back for the bankruptcy estate. [Forbes]

In the FTX bankruptcy, a group of ad-hoc FTX creditors with $2 billion in claims want to participate in the bankruptcy without revealing their identities. They include “large institutional market makers and asset managers.” This is the precise sort of creditor that the Bankruptcy Act is not intended to protect from public scrutiny. [Doc 1137, PDF]

FTX appears to have been hiding money under the names of employees. The OKX exchange, formerly OKex, has agreed to turn over $157 million in FTX funds. $150 million of that was in an account of a former FTX employee. The ex-employee says the account was opened on behalf of Alameda. He has agreed to forfeit the assets. [Doc 1189, PDF; Doc 1190, PDF]

Binance: This is fine

The CFTC lawsuit against Binance, which we covered in detail on Tuesday, has rattled customers. Within days, the exchange saw outflows of $2 billion, out of a claimed reserve of $63.2 billion, according to Nansen. Currently, 28% of Binance reserves are in Tether and 10% are in BUSD. [WSJ, paywalled; Nansen]

The three large US hedge funds trading on Binance weren’t named in the CFTC complaint — though Radix Trading later came forward and said that they were “Trading Firm A.” Radix insists they did nothing wrong — they ran their apparent conspiracy to violate commodities laws past their in-house legal team, after all. [WSJ, paywalled]

But the CFTC complaint has “already sent chills” across the commodity trading industry — particularly firms who make their money from real commodity trading and only dabble in the toxic waste barrel of crypto. Market makers are wondering if they’re risking their own broker-dealer licenses. [Bloomberg]

Cash withdrawals from Binance US are no longer working via ACH through Signature. Binance says: “ACH deposits and withdrawals for a small subset of our users were disrupted last week and, out of an abundance of caution, remain paused. Our teams are working through this transition and expect to restore functionality within the next 24 hours.” It’s probably fine. Your funds are safe. [Reddit]

You’ll be shocked to hear that Binance kept substantial business links to China for years after its claimed 2017 exit, despite Binance executives repeatedly saying otherwise. [FT]

The Block reported in 2019 that Binance had offices in Shanghai. CZ hit the roof and threatened to sue them, with the explicit aim of outspending them on lawyers … and The Block stood by its story. (Ben Munster, then of Decrypt, helped with the response story, though The Block took out Ben’s harsher additions.) [The Block, 2019; Twitter, archive; Twitter, archive; The Block, 2019]

The sale of Voyager Digital to Binance US is on hold. The Department of Justice and the US Trustee appealed the sale on the basis that the order granted inappropriate immunity from prosecution, and asked for a stay. The appeals court has granted the request for a stay while the appeal proceeds. [Doc 1222, PDF; Doc 1223, PDF; Bloomberg]

Be your own Signature Bank

In his statement on the recent bank failures and the federal regulatory response, FDIC Chairman Martin Greunberg explained why Signature failed: the bank was insolvent, contrary to Barney Frank’s claims. [FDIC, PDF]

On March 10, Signature Bank lost 20 percent of its total deposits in a matter of hours, depleting its cash position and leaving it with a negative balance with the Federal Reserve as of close of business. Bank management could not provide accurate data regarding the amount of the deficit, and resolution of the negative balance required a prolonged joint effort among Signature Bank, regulators, and the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York to pledge collateral and obtain the necessary funding from the Federal Reserve’s Discount Window to cover the negative outflows. This was accomplished with minutes to spare before the Federal Reserve’s wire room closed. 

Over the weekend, liquidity risk at the bank rose to a critical level as withdrawal requests mounted, along with uncertainties about meeting those requests, and potentially others in light of the high level of uninsured deposits, raised doubts about the bank’s continued viability. 

Ultimately, on Sunday, March 12, the NYSDFS closed Signature Bank and appointed the FDIC as receiver within 48 hours of SVB’s failure.

The FDIC has told crypto clients with deposits at Signature Bank that they have until April 5 to close their accounts and move their money. The FDIC is looking to sell off Signature’s Signet inter-crypto-exchange dark liquidity pool. [Bloomberg]

Frances Coppola explains precisely what happened at Signature. [Coppola Comment]

We noted previously how larger US banks don’t want to go within a mile of crypto. But some smaller banks are still feeling lucky. [WSJ, paywall]

The SEC shuts down Beaxy

The Beaxy crypto exchange shuttered after the SEC filed charges against it for failing to register as a national securities exchange, broker, and clearing agency, and over its 2018 ICO. The SEC also charged a market maker operating on Beaxy as an unregistered dealer. [SEC press release; complaint, PDF; CoinDesk]

Beaxy ran a “private sale” ICO for its internal exchange token BXY from May 2018 to June 2019. The SEC is charging Beaxy and its founder Artak Hamazaspyan over the ICO as an unregistered offering of securities to US retail.

That’s the sort of complaint we’re used to seeing from the SEC — but they’re also charging Windy Inc., who ran the Beaxy platform, and Windy’s founders, Nicholas Murphy and Randolph Abbott, over unregistered securities trading on the exchange.

If cryptos being traded are securities — and it’s likely that most are — that leaves even the normal activities of an exchange subject to a vast array of additional regulations.

The SEC is also charging Brian Peterson and Braverock Investments as unregistered dealers for market-making on Beaxy for the BXY and Dragonchain DRGN tokens. The SEC sued Dragonchain in August 2022, alleging that DRGN was an unregistered offering of securities; that case is proceeding. [SEC, 2022; case docket]

Hamazaspyan is also alleged to have misappropriated $900,000 from the ICO for his own use. Murphy and Abbott discovered this in October 2019 and convinced Hamazaspyan to pay back $420,000 to Beaxy and let Windy run Beaxy going forward.

Windy, Murphy, Abbott, Peterson, and Braverock settled, paying a total penalty between them of $228,579. The SEC case against Beaxy and Hamazaspyan over the ICO is proceeding.

Beaxy shut down on Tuesday, March 28, owing to “the uncertain regulatory environment surrounding our business.” We think it’s deadly certain. [Beaxy, archive]

This is the first SEC action over securities trading on an exchange. It’s a likely template for future SEC cases against other crypto exchanges — like, say, Coinbase.

The Coinbase employee convicted in a criminal case of wire fraud by insider trading is fighting an SEC civil case claiming that the insider-traded tokens were securities. [WSJ]

SEC chair Gary Gensler will be testifying before Congress on April 18. The very non-partisan committee announces that “Republicans will hold @GaryGensler accountable for his flagrant disregard for the law, jurisdiction, and the APA.” (The Administrative Procedure Act.) We hope the Blockchain Eight show up. [Twitter]

More good news for decentralization

Judge Larry Alan Burns of the Southern District of California has denied the motion to dismiss of members of the bZx DAO who held governance tokens (BZRX), finding the DAO is plausibly alleged to be a general partnership. [Order, PDF; CoinDesk]

One of the earliest objections to the original DAO in 2016 was that it would be a general partnership, leaving everyone involved jointly and severally liable. (This is why incorporation is a thing.) The same problem was frequently noted in the rise in DAOs in the recent crypto bubble. Nobody involved can claim they had no idea.

Regulatory clarity, European style

The European Banking Authority has a new consultation paper on anti-money laundering (AML) risk factors that national bank regulators should consider. Crypto-asset providers are listed as an area that regulators should examine closely, including if “Distributed Ledger Technology” is “essential to the sector’s business model and operation” or “where services of the subject of assessment are provided using DLT or blockchain technology.” Comments are due by June 29, 2023. [EBA, PDF]

Coming soon in European AML: no anonymous crypto payments in the EU of over 1,000 EUR. Crypto asset managers will be required to verify “their customers’ identity, what they own and who controls the company.” [EP]

Terra-Luna

After he was arrested last week, Do Kwon of Terraform Labs is serving time in a Montenegrin prison. Kwon is likely to stay in jail there for at least a year, while his appeals and extradition hearings proceed. We expect he’ll be sent to South Korea first, and only then to the US. [YNA, in Korean; Protos

South Korean prosecutors are making another effort to arrest Terraform Labs cofounder Daniel Shin, who left the company in March 2020. [Bloomberg]

MicroStrategy doubles down 

As part of winding the bank down, Silvergate struck a deal with MicroStrategy to accept $161 million to repay a $205 million bitcoin-backed loan — taking a $44 million loss. Silvergate had said repeatedly that its bitcoin-backed loans were safe. [WSJ, paywall]

MicroStrategy sold 1.35 million shares of MSTR in Q1 2023, diluting shareholders by over 10% to pay off its Silvergate loan — and bought $150 million more BTC between February 16 and March 23. This is a Hail Mary pass praying for number to go up, which it is quite unlikely to do. [8-K; Twitter]

More good news for bitcoin

Hindenburg Research’s latest short-seller report is on Jack Dorsey’s Block, formerly Square. Cash App’s growth is aimed at targeting the “unbanked” — which mostly means embracing noncompliance to grow its user base. A Cash App employee told Hindenburg, “every criminal has a Square Cash App account.” And this is before Block has even got into crypto in any substantial way. [Hindenburg]

Indicted crypto promoter Guo Wengui used his culture-war social network Gettr to pump cryptos. Wengui was fined a billion dollars by the SEC in 2021 over his crypto offerings. [Washington Post]

The British Virgin Islands has ordered Three Arrows Capital founders Zu Shu and Kyle Davies to attend an examination on May 22 or be in contempt of court. We’re sure they’ll be right on that. [CoinDesk]

Freeing yourself from fiat history

If you click on a lot of old links to theblockcrypto.com, it’ll tell you that The Block has “sunset our News+ product” — their previous paywalled news offering. They didn’t open up those old pages — they’ve just effectively deleted a whole swathe of their journalism from 2018 to 2020!

We discovered this when Amy went looking for one of her old Block pieces on Binance for our article on Tuesday and when David looked for various other Block articles for today’s story.

You’d think a publisher wouldn’t just trash their own search optimization — but in practice, both mainstream and specialist publications destroy their own URLs and content all the time. So it’s pretty likely this was an error. Hopefully a reversible one.

We remember when Decrypt moved their domain from decryptmedia.com to decrypt.co. They saw their Google hits go through the floor and thought they’d been shadowbanned … not realizing they’d done it to themselves. The Block changed its URL to theblock.co around the same time, with similar effects.

In the meantime: ARCHIVE EVERYTHING. Stuff that’s blocked from the Internet Archive saves just fine into archive.is, and archive.is also accepts pages from the Internet Archive, Google cache, and Bing cache and indexes them correctly under the source URL. David uses and recommends the Get Archive extension for Firefox. [Mozilla Add-Ons]