FACT CHECK: Did The SEC Approve Bitcoin ETF On January 9, 2024?
A post shared on X, formerly Twitter, claims the Security and Exchange Commission (SEC) approved bitcoin ETFs on Jan. 9, a day prior to the actual approval on Jan 10.
SEC Approves Bitcoin Spot ETF https://t.co/46joQ8194c
— zerohedge (@zerohedge) January 9, 2024
The SEC did not make any such approval on Jan. 9. The announcement was made by an unauthorized party and was soon deleted. The SEC did, however, approve bitcoin ETFs on Jan. 10.
The SEC approved bitcoin exchange transfer funds on Wednesday, according to CNN. The agency gave approval to 11 different firms that applied to offer ETFs, the outlet reported.
Social media users have claimed that the SEC already approved bitcoin ETFs on Jan. 9, a day prior to the actual Jan. 10 announcement, citing a tweet from the agency’s X account.
This claim, however, is false. The SEC’s account was compromised, according to Reuters. Both the SEC’s chairman and the SEC stated on X that the account had been compromised and the tweet was not authorized.
An SEC spokesperson told Check Your Fact in an email that an “unknown party” briefly accessed the SEC’s X account.
“The SEC has determined that there was unauthorized access to and activity on the @SECGov x.com account by an unknown party for a brief period of time shortly after 4 pm ET. That unauthorized access has been terminated. The SEC will work with law enforcement and our partners across government to investigate the matter and determine appropriate next steps relating to both the unauthorized access and any related misconduct,” the spokesperson said.
ZeroHedge later updated its article to note that the SEC announcement was false. The article also notes that the hack of the SEC’s X account was not due to X’s systems but because two-factor authentication had not been active on a number associated with the SEC. (Did Times Square Billboards Call Ceasefire Anti-Semitic?)
We can confirm that the account @SECGov was compromised and we have completed a preliminary investigation. Based on our investigation, the compromise was not due to any breach of X’s systems, but rather due to an unidentified individual obtaining control over a phone number…
— Safety (@Safety) January 10, 2024
“Based on our investigation, the compromise was not due to any breach of X’s systems, but rather due to an unidentified individual obtaining control over a phone number associated with the @SECGov account through a third party. We can also confirm that the account did not have two-factor authentication enabled at the time the account was compromised,” X’s Safety team tweeted Jan. 10.