The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has rejected allegations of ethical violations made against former Director of Corporate Finance Bill Hinman. This examination was conducted in light of documents requested under the Freedom of Information Act by the organization Empower Oversight.
Investigation and Ethical Assessments
Empower Oversight claimed that Hinman maintained financial ties with Simpson Thacher & Bartlett LLP prior to his 2018 Ethereum 
$2,266 speech. The SEC’s Office of Inspector General (OIG) report indicated that Hinman disclosed his financial interests during the hiring process and followed the recommended steps outlined by the SEC’s ethical committees.
“Bill Hinman disclosed his financial interests with STB upon joining the SEC and took necessary actions within the framework of SEC ethical rules.” – Office of Inspector General (OIG)
The Ethereum Speech and Related Discussions
The report examined the preparation and presentation process of the Ethereum speech delivered in 2018. Hinman indicated that Ether did not qualify as a security; however, internal discussions during this process revealed some disagreements. It was alleged that despite differing views from staff, Hinman advanced the process unilaterally.
“Even if the allegations are true, there is no conflict of interest for Hinman.” – Office of Inspector General (OIG)
Following the report’s release, some circles continued to criticize the SEC’s varying approaches to cryptocurrency asset management. The discussions raised public inquiries regarding the transparency of how definitions and applications of conflicts of interest are handled. The SEC attempted to clarify which cryptocurrency assets would be evaluated under the securities framework to reduce confusion.
Although the SEC report demonstrates that Hinman acted in accordance with established ethical rules during his tenure, it was observed that the discussions within the process did not sufficiently contribute to clarity. Expectations for the application of internal procedures and transparency in communications have noticeably increased. This situation may provide insights into how similar cases will be evaluated in the future.
