What do pizza chains, football clubs and crypto trading
platforms all have in common? They have all been reprimanded by the
Advertising Standards Authority (ASA) for advertisements relating
to crypto assets.
They are by no means alone. Even before the market volatility we have seen in recent
months, the ASA has been looking hard at the crypto economy,
including the companies, celebrities and influencers that endorse
them.
Indeed, back in November last year the ASA classified crypto
advertising as a ‘red alert’ priority issue.
The underlying issue here is that, for the most part,
cryptoassets are unregulated in the UK.
The government announced in January 2022 that it would be
strengthening the rules on misleading crypto ads, with the majority
of such ads set to be brought into the scope of the Financial Promotion Regime and under the
watchful eye of the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA), which wields
more power to sanction non-compliance than the ASA.
But this is still a little way off. In the meantime, the ASA is
dedicating considerable time and energy to investigating and
publishing rulings against UK advertisers of cryptoassets.
Virtually all of the ASA’s formal investigations in relation to
crypto ads over the past six months resulted in an upheld ruling
– meaning the ASA found the advertisers in breach of the
rules.
This has all contributed to a fast moving and often complex
environment for companies who are either seeking to promote their
crypto products and services (including exchanges), or those
looking to use other types of cryptoassets to enhance their wider
brand marketing (such as through competitions or prize draws).
Through its rulings, the ASA has sent the message that it wants
to be ‘firm’, with seemingly less emphasis on appearing
‘fair’. Also, through its rulings, the ASA has come up with
new rules by the back door. This means the underlying rules remain
the same, but the ASA has overlaid them with new requirements.
These include the need for crypto ads to include detailed warning
notices, for example to make clear that CGT may have to be paid on
profits made from the sale of cryptoassets.
For the brands that were the subject of the upheld rulings, it
was unfortunate that the ASA didn’t make its position clear on
these issues before launching investigations and publishing a slew
of adverse rulings on these issues.
In March this year, after publishing several upheld rulings, the
ASA issued an Enforcement Notice to clarify and summarise
its ‘guidance’ in this area. Since last month, the
ASA’s compliance team has been actively monitoring for problem
crypto ads. Expect to see more rulings coming in the next few weeks
and months. Where appropriate, the ASA will also report
non-compliance to the FCA.
What about NFTs?
NFTs are currently excluded from the government’s proposed
changes and fall outside the remit of the FCA, which means the ASA
is to all intents and purposes the only substantive NFT regulator
in town, with any ads and promotions needing to comply with the
advertising code. It would be very helpful, therefore, if the ASA
were to issue more guidance to explain its approach to regulating
ads for NFTs – instead of (or at least before) launching
investigations into advertisers that are doing their best to guess
how the ASA will interpret the existing rules.
In the ASA’s guidance on crypto ads over recent months, it
has occasionally lumped NFTs in with cryptocurrencies, while on
other occasions they are excluded – neither approach has been
helpful to advertisers in this fast moving area.
When it comes to promoting NFTs, former Premier League footballer Michael Owen is
perhaps the most recent high-profile celebrity to have come under
fire – as a result of his tweet claiming that his NFTs could
not lose value – a claim that was pretty swiftly clarified by
his business partner.
Crypto ad guidelines in focus
When promoting most types of crypto asset, and this includes
promotions by non-crypto brands that offer crypto assets for sale,
or as a prize, or that simply want to give them away, the ad must
make clear that crypto is unregulated; profits may be subject to
Capital Gains Tax (CGT); and that the value of the investment can
go down as well as up. Importantly, these qualifications have to be
prominent, in a way that’s appropriate to the medium of the
ad.
Advertisers should also avoid employing ‘FOMO’ tactics,
and must not trivialise investment in crypto by making it sound
like something quick, cheap and easy to do without the need to give
it any thought.
The Papa John’s example is a case in point. The pizza
company ran a promotion, offering £10 of free Bitcoin with
the purchase of pizza. This required participants to open a trading
account. The ASA considered that using pizza to promote a
cryptocurrency account “encouraged consumers to engage in
a high-risk investment without consideration and trivialised what
was a serious and potentially costly financial decision, especially
in the context of the intended audience who were likely to have
limited knowledge of cryptocurrency“.
To the outside observer it may be difficult to see how giving
someone £10 of Bitcoin prompts them to engage in high-risk
investment, or how that could be seen as a serious and potentially
costly financial decision. Also, some of the specific requirements,
including those around CGT, do smack of being made up on the hoof.
This is particularly odd given that CGT is only payable when
significant (five figure) profits are made, so it might not seem
irresponsible or misleading to omit any mention of a potential CGT
liability in an ad involving £10 worth of crypto.
But at least now the ASA has set out its stall, and if the ASA
remains consistent in its new approach, advertisers should have a
clearer understanding of what is required.
Targeting an ad at a more sophisticated, investment-savvy
audience can help, but when the ad is untargeted the ASA assumes it
will be viewed by the average member of the public, who isn’t
expected to know much (or anything) about crypto, and its
suitability or otherwise as an investment. The ASA sets a low bar
when it comes to determining whether and ad takes advantage of the
average consumer’s potential inexperience or credulity–
so advertisers are generally well advised to keep their message
relatively simple and straightforward.
Sensibly, the ASA advises against the use of jargon, which does
seem justifiable given the potential for misunderstanding in this
fast paced and relatively new sector. On balance, the requirement
for clear signposting of the risks makes sense in most scenarios
– even if the method by which the ASA came up with these
requirements was less than ideal.
Looking ahead
Taken together, the ASA has clearly made the most of the wide
discretion it has to apply the spirit, as well as the letter, of
the advertising codes – and has perhaps gone too far in some
respects.
Having said that, stricter rules are coming. The government and
the FCA are consulting on the new rulebook, which could mean
we’ll see far fewer influencers dabbling in crypto advertising,
and generally fewer crypto ads on social media full stop. Brands,
advertisers, and influencers in the crypto world will need to
continue to adapt quickly to survive.
Originally Published by City A.M.
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
