FinCEN MSB只是入场券,合规美股代币交易平台需要哪些牌照?

Odaily星球日报Published on 2025-08-17Last updated on 2025-08-17

原创 / Odaily 星球日报(@OdailyChina

作者 / Golem(@web 3_golem

今年随着特朗普政府放开加密监管,证券代币化赛道也有了实质性进展,美股代币交易平台如雨后春笋般涌现。但有了加密中心化交易所发展的前车之鉴,几乎所有美股代币交易平台在成立时都早早意识到了合规的重要性,并将其视为一大核心竞争力。特别是近期因 MyStonks“620 万美元”公关事件涉及监管(相关阅读:620 万美元提现受阻?MyStonks 直面回应:监管执法所致,非平台挪用),市场对于美股代币交易平台的合规性再次展开讨论。

那么,如果要做一家合规的美股代币交易平台,需要获得哪些牌照呢?市场上绝大多数美股代币交易平台采用的都是订单流模式,即用户在美股代币交易平台买卖美股代币,平台在链下通过美股账户 1:1 买卖对应美股份额,并且选择与有牌照的传统银行或券商合作托管用户资产。因此,本质上美股代币交易平台开展的是证券经纪/券商业务。

根据美 SEC 2025 年 7 月 9 日发布的关于证券代币化的 声明,代币化证券仍然是证券,市场参与者在进行这些交易时必须考虑并遵守联邦证券法。这意味着虽然目前美国针对美股代币交易平台的监管尚有模糊不清的地方。但从业务相似性角度,参考传统券商的合规要求对美股代币交易平台有很大的指导意义。如目前在美国具有合规性的美股代币交易平台 Dinari,就是按照传统券商/经纪商要求申请的监管合规,其是依据美 SEC(第 17 A(c)条)注册的证券过户代理人,且获得了获得美国证券经纪商注册资格。

不过在实际的业务场景中,是否对美国用户提供服务、是否会撮合/做市交易、是否提供法币入出金、是否亲自持有/托管实股等对美股代币交易平台要求对牌照都有区别。Odaily 星球日报将在本文中以美国对传统券商的合规要求作为参考,讨论一个合规的美股代币交易平台可能需要哪些牌照。(注:本文仅作为一般性讨论,不应作为企业正式的合规参考及法律建议)

FinCEN MSB(Money Services Business)注册(必拿)

FinCEN 全称为美国金融犯罪执法网络,它是美国财政部下属机构,主要负责执行反洗钱(AML)和反恐融资(CFT)相关法规,并监管包括虚拟货币在内的“货币服务业务”(MSB)。

FinCEN 在其 2019 年发布的 解释 中,就把“可兑换虚拟货币(CVC)”界定为“能与法币互换,或能作为法币替代物使用的虚拟货币”,并指出接受/传输或买卖 CVC 的“交换商/发行人/管理员”都需在 FinCEN 登记为 MSB 并履行 AML/CFT 报告与记录义务。

对于合规的美股代币交易平台而言,这几乎是必拿的牌照。因为即使大多数美股代币交易平台不直接涉及美元出入金,但他们的业务基本都基于接收和传输以美元挂钩的稳定币,这符合 FinCEN 对 CVC 的定义,因此会触及 FinCEN 监管。

ATS(Alternative Trading System)牌照(存在模糊)

ATS 牌照全称为另类交易系统牌照,它是由美 SEC 授予的,允许持牌方运营一个不属于传统证券交易所但依然能撮合证券买卖的交易平台。一般而言,数字资产交易平台并不需要这个牌照,因为数字资产大多已被认定为商品,但因代币化的美股仍属于证券,因此触及到了美 SEC 的监管领域。

申请 ATS 牌照需要先在美 SEC 登记注册为 broker-dealer(经纪自营商),然后申请成为 FINRA(金融业监管局)成员,才能向美 SEC 提交 Form ATS 申请,提交申请后需要持续向美 SEC 报告运营数据,并遵守相关交易透明度与反洗钱规定。

但美 SEC 对 ATS 牌照的要求是平台运营着一个证券撮合交易系统。不过现实情况是,目前大多数美股代币交易平台并不撮合来自多方的美股买卖交易,而是采用订单流模式,与用户一对一交易,因此暂时还不在 ATS 范畴内。但因仍然涉及证劵交易,平台依旧必须拿到 broker-dealer 牌照。

成为 FINRA/SIPC 会员(推荐拿)

FINRA(金融业监管局)是美国的自律性证券行业监管机构(非政府部门,但受美 SEC 监督)。负责监管券商和注册经纪人,制定并执行行业规则、进行审计检查、考核执照、处理行业纪律和投资者投诉,并运行 BrokerCheck(查询券商/经纪人背景的工具)。

在美国,涉及证券买卖的经纪商(broker-dealer)都必须注册,并且绝大多数情况下要成为 FINRA 成员,FINRA 负责日常监管、业务规则、反洗钱、合规体系等。美股代币交易平台作为类券商和证劵经纪服务,为了合规也应该加入 FINRA 会员。

SIPC(证券投资者保护公司)是由国会设立的非营利机构,是一种投资者保护机制,当一家 SIPC 成员的券商破产且客户的现金或证券被挪用或丢失时,SIPC 可帮助恢复客户资产或提供现金/证券赔付。加入 SIPC 并非是法律要求但已经成为行业常态,不过前提是平台必须注册成为 broker-dealer,在美国大多数面向公众的注册 broker-dealer 都是 SIPC 成员。

虽然 SIPC 并未明确说明保护代币化资产,但鉴于美股代币本质上还是证券,因此客户保护义务依然可能触发,合规的美股代币交易平台应该成为 SIPC 会员。

过户代理人注册(不必须)

过户代理人(Transfer Agent)是受美 SEC 监管的,主要负责证券登记、过户、股东名册维护。当投资者买卖股票时,过户代理人会更新股东记录,确保股份从卖方名下转到买方名下,还会处理股息派发、配股、股票分割等事件。传统金融的券商和经纪商一般都会申请过户代理人。

美股代币交易平台也可以申请注册过户代理人,如 Dinari 就成功申请了这个牌照,但一般情况下,大多数美股代币交易平台会选择与已有牌照的券商或银行合作,并不亲自申请注册过户代理人。

但值得注意的一个问题是,有些美股代币交易平台会给平台持币用户派发股息的功能,这也就涉及到记录持股人权属关系,为了合规就需要平台注册过户代理人,或与委托的过户代理人制定详细合作方案。例如,Dinari 就将股息以在 Arbitrum One 上发行的 USD+稳定币形式分发给美股代币持有人。

CFTC(商品期货交易委员会)相关注册(衍生品业务必拿)

如果美股代币交易平台涉及美股代币的合约或杠杠交易,那么也需要向 CFTC(美国商品期货交易委员会)注册。因为美股代币本质上还是证券,因此以它为基础资产衍生出合约或杠杆交易,就会被纳入 CFTC 的衍生品监管范畴。

如果为用户处理期货/衍生品交易并收取保证金需要 FCM(Futures Commission Merchant)注册;如果平台衍生品交易涉及外汇则需要 RFED(Retail Foreign Exchange Dealer)注册;如果平台包含撮合系统并引入客户到衍生品市场,那么就需要 Introducing Broker (IB)注册。

此次之外,提供美股代币衍生品交易的平台还要遵守 NFA(美国全国期货协会)的规则。

不对美国用户提供服务,合规难度减半

综上所述,要成为一个合规的美股代币交易平台并不容易,拿到单一或几个牌照也不意味着“全合规”。但为什么市场上还有美股交易平台宣称自己合规呢?或者说是否还有另一种合规标准。

答案是有的,事实上只要坚持不对美国用户提供服务,合规难度将大幅降低。只要美股代币交易平台不对美国用户提供服务,理论上 ATS 牌照、FINRA/SIPC、过户代理人、CFTC 注册均不需要。市场上也有许多美股代币交易平台通过 KYC 验证身份、IP 屏蔽等限制美国人及美国地区,以此达到不对美国用户提供服务的要求,从而绕过美国繁琐的监管程序。

对于面向全球市场的美股代币交易平台,限制美国人及美国地区访问并不会对其业务造成太大影响。但需要注意的是,美国作为“世界警察”,美 SEC 和 CFTC 的“长臂管辖”也很强,如果美国用户通过 VPN、代理或第三方渠道绕过了 KYC 或 IP 限制,那么仍会触发美 SEC 和 CFTC 的合规监管要求。

这样的例子在 CEX 中已经发生过很多次,许多宣称退出美国市场的交易所仍遭到了美 SEC/CFTC 起诉。因此,对于美股代币交易平台而言,即使当前阶段的目标是非美国用户,但也要未雨绸缪,避免落入美 SEC/CFTC 的“监管陷阱”。

Related Reads

How the CLARITY Act Reshapes the Stablecoin Yield Economy

The CLARITY Act, recently advanced by the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, fundamentally reshapes the stablecoin yield economy by closing loopholes left by the earlier GENIUS Act. Its Section 404 expands the ban on "hold-to-earn" rewards to all Digital Asset Service Providers (DASPs) and their affiliates, prohibiting any passive, interest-like yield. Crucially, it introduces a legal distinction, permitting "use-to-earn" rewards based on actual activities like spending, trading, or staking. In anticipation of this regulatory shift, major Wall Street asset managers—Morgan Stanley, BlackRock, and JPMorgan—have launched a series of tokenized money market funds (e.g., BlackRock's BRSRV, JPMorgan's JLTXX) designed explicitly for stablecoin reserve assets. These products represent a new, compliant yield layer: the stablecoin issuer earns interest from the underlying tokenized fund, which can then be passed to users through redesigned activity-based rewards. This marks a paradigm shift from a "hold-to-earn" to a "use-to-earn" market. While pathways remain for exchanges to redesign rewards (Path A) and for DeFi protocols to offer yield (Path B), the tokenized reserve asset layer (Path C) emerges as the most robust and strategically positioned infrastructure. However, this concentration—exemplified by BlackRock's BUIDL fund backing over 90% of USDtb's reserves—introduces new systemic risks. The final outcome hinges on regulatory decisions, particularly the OCC's proposed 20% cap on tokenized assets in reserves, which will determine the scalability of this new financial infrastructure layer.

marsbit1h ago

How the CLARITY Act Reshapes the Stablecoin Yield Economy

marsbit1h ago

Kalshi and Coinbase Receive CFTC Approval, Ushering in the Most Regulation-Friendly Era for the Crypto Industry?

The U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) took two landmark actions on May 29. It approved Kalshi's application to list a Bitcoin perpetual futures contract and issued a no-action letter to Coinbase Financial Markets. This allows Coinbase to offer certain perpetual futures products to U.S. customers through a subsidiary, with digital assets permitted as collateral. These moves, coupled with a new CFTC policy statement, provide a clearer regulatory pathway for perpetual contracts in the U.S., moving them from a regulatory gray area. CFTC Chair Mike Selig stated this is a key step for U.S. crypto leadership but noted the policy is not yet permanent. The article explains that CFTC's previous reluctance stemmed from legal ambiguities, as perpetual contracts lack an expiration date. However, such contracts dominate global crypto derivatives, accounting for ~78% of centralized exchange volume in 2025, forcing U.S. regulators to adapt to competition from offshore platforms like Hyperliquid. The approvals offer two compliance paths: Kalshi's direct listing and Coinbase's model using foreign futures. This is expected to attract institutional capital back to regulated U.S. venues, stimulate the launch of more products like ETH perpetuals, and enhance U.S. competitiveness in the global crypto derivatives market. The author suggests this may signal a "regulatorily friendly" era for crypto.

marsbit4h ago

Kalshi and Coinbase Receive CFTC Approval, Ushering in the Most Regulation-Friendly Era for the Crypto Industry?

marsbit4h ago

Sharplink CEO: Ethereum's Future Is Playing Out Now

This article presents a perspective from Joseph Chalom, CEO of Sharplink and a former BlackRock executive. He argues that current controversies surrounding the Ethereum Foundation (EF) and ETH's price miss the bigger picture for institutional adoption. Chalom asserts that Ethereum is decisively winning in the three key attributes institutions value most: trust, security, and liquidity. He cites its dominance in stablecoin settlement, tokenized real-world assets (RWA), and high-value DeFi as evidence. This success is attributed to the EF's consistent, long-term protocol development over a decade, including major upgrades like The Merge and a robust future roadmap. He defends Ethereum's decentralization as a core strength, not a weakness, stating institutions require a neutral infrastructure not controlled by any single entity. Comparing ETH to Amazon, Chalom suggests critics focusing on short-term price are missing its potential to become the foundational settlement layer for the entire global financial system. The article encourages a contrarian "be greedy when others are fearful" investment approach, drawing parallels to Warren Buffett's strategy and BlackRock's continued investment during crypto winters. Chalom concludes that while the EF correctly focuses on core protocol attributes (CROPS: Censorship Resistance, Capture Resistance, Open Source, Privacy, Security), a leadership gap exists in market-facing narrative and institutional adoption. He calls for ecosystem participants, including his own firm Sharplink, to become more vocal advocates to support Ethereum's impending "supercycle" of institutional adoption.

链捕手5h ago

Sharplink CEO: Ethereum's Future Is Playing Out Now

链捕手5h ago

Deconstructing the Investment Methodology of the 'Stock God Serenity' in One Article

"Serenity's Bottleneck Investment Methodology: A Deep Dive" This article dissects the "bottleneck point investment" strategy of the pseudonymous investor Serenity, known for exceptional returns (YTD 4502.45%). The core methodology involves identifying a major technological trend (e.g., AI compute expansion), mapping its supply chain, and investing early in the most irreplaceable, supply-constrained upstream component before the market fully values it. The framework is broken down into a five-factor model: 1. **Deterministic Demand**: Anchored in a large, validated trend. 2. **Constrained Supply**: The component must be difficult to replicate or scale quickly. 3. **Low Market Attention**: Opportunities exist where coverage is sparse. 4. **Value Capture**: The company must have pricing power, high margins, and customer lock-in. 5. **Catalyst**: A near-term event to trigger price discovery (earnings, customer ramp, etc.). The article provides illustrative examples like $AXTI (InP substrates for photonics), $RPI (edge hardware for AI agents), and $AAOI/$LITE (components for cloud ASICs). To apply this method, a six-step process is outlined: identify the macro trend, map the supply chain, pinpoint the true bottleneck, gather evidence (client wins, certifications), assess risks ("anti-thesis table"), and size the position according to research depth. Crucially, the article notes significant limitations: risk of overfitting inferences from sparse data, valuation challenges for pre-revenue companies, liquidity/reflexivity risks due to Serenity's own market influence, and survivor bias amplified by a strong AI bull market. The key takeaway is to emulate the rigorous research process—finding the trend, the bottleneck, the evidence—rather than blindly copying specific stock picks, emphasizing the discipline of "walking through the narrow gate."

marsbit5h ago

Deconstructing the Investment Methodology of the 'Stock God Serenity' in One Article

marsbit5h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片