Securitize hires former PayPal exec as US tokenization gains traction

cointelegraphPublished on 2025-12-09Last updated on 2025-12-09

Abstract

Securitize, a major tokenization platform, has hired former PayPal executive Jerome Roche as its new general counsel to strengthen its push for tokenized equity in the US. Roche previously led PayPal’s expansion into digital assets, including the PYUSD stablecoin. The company emphasized that tokenized securities are already accessible to US investors, countering the perception that such offerings are primarily available abroad. CEO Carlos Domingo stated that Securitize operates within a clear US regulatory framework using SEC-approved infrastructure, enabling fully compliant access to onchain securities. This development follows Securitize’s recent regulatory approval in the EU and signals growing acceptance of tokenization in the US, further evidenced by the SEC ending its investigation into rival platform Ondo Finance.

Major tokenization platform Securitize has doubled down on its push to bring tokenized equity to US investors, naming a former PayPal executive as its new general counsel.

Securitize on Tuesday announced the appointment of ex-PayPal executive Jerome Roche, who led the company’s expansion into digital asset projects, including the PayPal USD (PYUSD) stablecoin.

Securitize also said its tokenized securities are already available to US investors, challenging the notion that most issuers prefer to offer such products abroad due to local stock access.

“There’s been a perception that tokenized securities must be offered primarily outside the US, but our experience shows the opposite,” Securitize CEO Carlos Domingo told Cointelegraph.

“Clear regulatory path” for tokenized stocks in the US

According to Securitize, operating real-world asset (RWA) tokenization offerings inside the US regulatory perimeter is “not only possible, but scalable, at institutional quality.”

“We’ve demonstrated that there is a clear regulatory path for issuers to natively tokenize assets for US investors,” Domingo said.

“These are not synthetic representations, or derivatives, but real securities onchain,” the CEO said, adding:

“We operate using SEC-regulated infrastructure, including a registered transfer agent broker-dealer, and fund admin, which allows US investors to access and legally hold tokenized securities in a fully compliant framework.”

Securitize’s optimistic outlook on the US tokenization comes days after the platform obtained regulatory approval to operate as an investment company and a trading ánd settlement system in the European Union on Nov. 26. According to the company, the approval positioned it as one of the first operators for regulated digital securities infrastructure in both the US and EU.

“For the first time, modern ledger technology is giving us the ability to record ownership, settle transactions, and move value in ways that are fundamentally better than the fragmented systems we’ve inherited,” Securitize’s newly appointed general counsel, Roche, said in the announcement.

“Innovation only works when it fits squarely within the guardrails of applicable law,” he added, underscoring Securitize’s global push for regulated tokenized securities.

Related: US Treasurys lead tokenization wave as CoinShares predicts 2026 growth

Securitize’s news is another sign of the US warming to tokenization. On Monday, the Securities and Exchange Commission dropped its investigation into rival tokenization platform Ondo Finance.

Ondo said the decision marks a new chapter for tokenized securities in the US, where they are poised to become a “core part of the capital markets.”

Magazine: When privacy and AML laws conflict: Crypto projects’ impossible choice

Dialogue with Jia Hang | Looking Back at Two Decades of Chinese Payment Going Global

**Summary: A Conversation with Jia Hang on Two Decades of China's Payment Globalization** Jia Hang, a veteran with over twenty years in payments, reflects on China's attempts to build a global payment network through three key phases: UnionPay (card networks), Alipay+ (digital wallets), and now, stablecoins. His journey began at UnionPay International, aiming to establish China's card network abroad. While successful in following Chinese tourists ("where Chinese go, UnionPay goes"), it struggled to achieve true global scale. The core lesson: card networks like Visa/Mastercard's unassailable advantage isn't just technical standards, but their deeply entrenched **governance and profit-sharing models** that create powerful network effects. Competing as the "same species" is nearly impossible. At Ant Group, he led Alipay+, a strategy to bypass card networks by interconnecting local e-wallets worldwide. While innovative, it faced a similar ceiling. Mobile QR payments and card swipes were essentially **the same species competing for the same pie**, lacking a disruptive value proposition for users or a sustainable new incentive model to replace the card networks' established flywheel. Today, at Singapore's DCS, Jia focuses on stablecoin-based payments. He argues stablecoins represent a fundamental shift. They are not competing with Visa for consumer payments but challenging the **traditional banking and account system for value movement**. Products like "U Cards" (stablecoin-linked payment cards) are transitional, leveraging existing card networks for acceptance while building new rails. The real potential lies in stablecoins enabling seamless, low-cost global value transfer, potentially reorganizing the financial infrastructure around **accounts rather than cards**. Jia believes stablecoin adoption for local retail payments, cross-border transactions, and as high-yield savings vehicles is becoming irreversible. This could gradually reduce reliance on traditional fiat channels, especially in regions with weak currencies or capital controls. The quest for the "next global payment network" continues, now centered on whether stablecoins can successfully bridge Web2 and Web3, establish new governance, and create compelling user value beyond mere cost reduction.

marsbit2m ago

Dialogue with Jia Hang | Looking Back at Two Decades of Chinese Payment Going Global

marsbit2m ago

Circle's Stock Price Plunges 76%, Hong Kong Dollar Stablecoin Set to Launch Within Two Weeks

Circle's stock price has plunged approximately 76% from its 2023 peak, reflecting a major market revaluation. Despite this, Circle President Heath Tarbert emphasized the company's focus on long-term execution and its dominant position with USDC's $73 billion circulation across 34 blockchains. The competitive landscape is intensifying. A new consortium-backed stablecoin, Open USD, is attempting to challenge incumbents by sharing reserve yields with partners. More significantly, Visa's new stablecoin platform, initially supporting Open USD while also being compatible with USDC, could erode Circle's network effects. In response, Circle is expanding into real-world payments through partnerships like the one with Japan's JCB. Separately, Tether (USDT) faces a two-year compliance window under new U.S. regulations, requiring it to adjust its reserve composition away from assets like Bitcoin and loans towards cash and U.S. Treasuries. Meanwhile, in Hong Kong, Standard Chartered-backed fintech firm Dian Dian is poised to launch a licensed HKD-pegged stablecoin (HKDAP), moving the industry into a phase where the real test is integrating licensed stablecoins into actual payment flows and corporate treasury systems. The sharp decline in Circle's stock underscores a broader shift: the stablecoin market is moving from a winner-takes-all dynamic to a multi-player competitive arena where execution, compliance, and real-world utility are becoming paramount.

marsbit3m ago

Circle's Stock Price Plunges 76%, Hong Kong Dollar Stablecoin Set to Launch Within Two Weeks

marsbit3m ago

Amidst Capital's Encirclement, Decentralization is the Sole Defense for Public Blockchains

In a landscape dominated by power and profit motives, the author argues that decentralization is not merely one desirable feature among many in blockchain design—it is the singular, non-negotiable defense against corporate and capital capture. The article adopts a Machiavellian, realist perspective on human institutions, positing that businesses will inevitably attempt to co-opt any valuable network to protect their profits and dominance. While external attacks like 51% forks are often discussed, the greater existential risk is internal capture—the gradual erosion of a protocol’s neutrality by vested interests, as seen historically with platforms like Visa and Google. The piece critiques permissioned chains, highly centralized “permissionless” layer-1s, and layer-2s without sufficient decentralization (e.g., single sequencers) as inherently vulnerable. These compromised systems, promoted by established financial players, are framed as delaying tactics to stifle truly open networks that threaten existing high-fee, inefficient business models. Real-world examples, such as closed enterprise consortiums that exclude competitors, illustrate how such systems cement oligopolies rather than foster innovation. The author concludes that while decentralized protocols like Ethereum are imperfect and costly to operate, they represent the only viable long-term equilibrium. In a market where value naturally flows to the most secure and neutral settlement layer, only maximally decentralized public blockchains can resist being subsumed by capital and powerful incumbents.

Foresight News13m ago

Amidst Capital's Encirclement, Decentralization is the Sole Defense for Public Blockchains

Foresight News13m ago

Who Decides the Rules of Bitcoin? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

Bitcoin's governance is once again at the center of a heated debate, this time ignited by BIP-110, the "Reduced Data Temporary Softfork." This proposal aims to curb non-monetary data (like inscriptions and Runes) by introducing seven new consensus-layer restrictions over a year, such as limiting new output scripts to 34 bytes and restoring the OP_RETURN cap to 83 bytes. The controversy stems from BIP-110's fundamental shift: it moves the battle against "spam" from node relay and miner policies to the consensus layer, rendering currently valid transactions invalid. Supporters, arguing that default policy governance has failed (highlighted by Bitcoin Core v30's relaxation of OP_RETURN limits), see this as necessary to protect node resources and Bitcoin's monetary focus. Opponents, led by figures like Michael Saylor and Adam Back, warn it dangerously centralizes governance. Saylor listed 110 reasons against it, criticizing its low 55% miner activation threshold and potential for chain splits. Back emphasized Bitcoin's "permissionless" ethos, arguing no single group should impose value judgments via consensus rules. Further complicating matters, technical critiques suggest BIP-110 may be technically circumventable, and a "BlockSlop" vulnerability in its upgrade path poses a consensus risk. The debate has drawn in diverse stakeholders: miners (with pools like Ocean signaling support and Foundry polling clients), node operators (like Bitcoin Knots), and new players like corporate treasury holder MicroStrategy (Saylor), whose market influence adds a novel dimension. Ultimately, BIP-110 acts as a governance stress test, exposing the unresolved question: who decides Bitcoin's rules? It pits the authority of miners, node operators, developers, and capital holders against each other, with each side claiming to defend Bitcoin's core principles of neutrality and security.

marsbit30m ago

Who Decides the Rules of Bitcoin? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

marsbit30m ago

Who Decides Bitcoin's Rules? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate

Title: Who Decides Bitcoin's Rules? BIP-110 Ignites Governance Debate A new technical proposal, BIP-110 (Reduced Data Temporary Softfork), has sparked a fundamental governance debate within the Bitcoin community. It aims to impose new consensus rules for one year to limit non-financial data (like inscriptions and Runes) on-chain, moving beyond simple node and miner policy filters to invalidate currently valid transactions. Supporters argue that default policies have failed due to workarounds, necessitating consensus-layer changes to protect Bitcoin's core monetary function from data spam. Critics, including Michael Saylor and Adam Back, contend this dangerously centralizes judgment, undermines permissionlessness, and sets a risky governance precedent. They advocate for market-based solutions like fees or Layer 2s instead. The debate exposes deeper tensions: miners are divided on activation; node operators assert their sovereignty; Bitcoin Core developers influence defaults without direct accountability; and large corporate holders like MicroStrategy now wield narrative influence. Technically, BIP-110 may not fully block data and carries a disclosed consensus bug risk. Ultimately, BIP-110 acts as a stress test, forcing the community to confront the unresolved question: who legitimately decides what Bitcoin is and how it evolves, amidst competing claims from miners, nodes, developers, and capital holders.

链捕手42m ago

Trading

Spot