SEC Market Structure Proposal Draws Attention From Tokenized Stock Advocates

bitcoinistPublicado a 2026-06-12Actualizado a 2026-06-12

Resumen

The SEC has proposed eliminating two key equity market structure rules, Regulation NMS Rules 611 and 610(e), which govern order routing and the display of quotes. While the proposal is aimed at simplifying traditional markets and reducing costs, it has drawn attention from advocates for tokenized stocks. The reason is that current rules, which require checking the best prices across venues, are difficult to reconcile with on-chain trading models like automated market makers (AMMs). A more flexible structure could theoretically make it easier to design compliant blockchain-based systems for trading tokenized equities. However, the proposal is not specifically about crypto, and tokenized stocks would still need to meet numerous other securities regulations. The change is now open for public comment and faces a lengthy process before any final adoption.

TL;DR

  • The SEC has proposed rescinding Regulation NMS Rules 611 and 610(e), both tied to U.S. equity market structure.
  • The proposal is not a crypto rule, and the SEC did not frame it as a blockchain or tokenized-stock measure.
  • Industry analysts say the change could matter for tokenized equities because current routing and quote rules are difficult to reconcile with on-chain trading models.
  • The proposal is open for public comment and still faces a long rulemaking process before any final change.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has proposed rescinding two Regulation NMS rules that shape how traditional U.S. equity markets route and display orders, a move that could also become important for the future structure of tokenized stocks.

The SEC’s proposal focuses on Rule 611, known as the Order Protection or Trade-Through Rule, and Rule 610(e), which restricts locked and crossed quotations. These are equity-market-structure rules, not crypto rules, and the SEC’s press release does not describe the proposal as being designed for blockchain markets.

Still, the proposed rollback is drawing attention from digital asset market-structure watchers because tokenized equities and real-world-asset platforms must eventually fit into the same broader securities-market framework.

What The SEC Is Proposing

Rule 611 was adopted in 2005 and generally prevents trading centers from executing trades at prices inferior to protected quotes displayed on other venues. Rule 610(e) deals with locked or crossed quotations, where bids and offers across venues create market structure conflicts.

SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins said the rules have introduced unintended complexity after two decades of market evolution. The agency said the proposal is intended to simplify traditional equity market structure, reduce trading complexity, and lower costs for market participants.

The SEC estimated that removing the rules could save exchanges, alternative trading systems, broker-dealers, and OTC market makers between $54.2 million and $77 million annually in compliance, monitoring, and routing infrastructure costs.

The proposal will be open for a 60-day public comment period after publication in the Federal Register. That means it is not final, and the market will still have time to weigh in before any rule changes are adopted.

Why Tokenized Stocks Enter The Conversation

The tokenization angle is not part of the SEC’s stated rationale, so it needs careful handling. The possible relevance comes from how on-chain trading systems work compared with traditional equity venues.

Automated market makers, or AMMs, execute trades against liquidity pools using pricing formulas rather than routing each order across conventional venues to check the national best bid and offer. Under a strict trade-through framework, that model can be difficult to reconcile with tokenized versions of U.S. equities.

In other words, if a tokenized-stock AMM executes a trade at a price that does not match protected quotes elsewhere, it could create compliance problems under existing market-structure rules. A shift away from rigid per-trade routing requirements could, in theory, make it easier to design compliant blockchain-based equity trading systems.

That does not mean tokenized stocks suddenly become legal everywhere if the SEC finalizes the proposal. Exchanges, broker-dealers, alternative trading systems, custody providers, and tokenized-asset platforms would still need to satisfy a long list of securities-law requirements.

What Still Needs To Happen

The most important caveat is that the SEC proposal is still a proposal. It must go through the comment process, and the agency could revise, narrow, or abandon parts of it before any final rule is adopted.

There are also remaining exchange-level and FINRA rules that may require separate updates. A Regulation NMS change would not automatically remove every barrier facing tokenized equities or real-world-asset markets.

For crypto investors, the significance is therefore indirect but real. Traditional market-structure rules help determine what kinds of trading systems can legally operate in U.S. securities markets. If those rules become more flexible, the path for tokenized equities may become easier to map.

The SEC is not proposing a crypto tokenization regime here. But by reconsidering older equity-market plumbing, the agency may be opening a broader conversation about what modern, automated, and potentially on-chain markets should look like.

Originally proposed by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission at SEC Newsroom

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat two Regulation NMS rules did the SEC propose to rescind in its market structure proposal?

AThe SEC proposed rescinding Regulation NMS Rule 611, known as the Order Protection or Trade-Through Rule, and Rule 610(e), which restricts locked and crossed quotations.

QWhy are advocates of tokenized stocks interested in the SEC's proposal to rescind Rules 611 and 610(e)?

AAdvocates are interested because the current routing and quote rules (like the trade-through requirement in Rule 611) are difficult to reconcile with on-chain trading models such as Automated Market Makers (AMMs). A more flexible market structure could make it easier to design compliant blockchain-based systems for tokenized equities.

QWhat is the SEC's stated primary reason for proposing this change, and what financial benefit does it estimate?

AThe SEC's stated reason is to simplify traditional equity market structure, reduce trading complexity, and lower costs for participants. The agency estimates the change could save exchanges, broker-dealers, and other market participants between $54.2 million and $77 million annually in compliance and infrastructure costs.

QDoes the SEC's proposal directly address or legalize tokenized stocks? Why or why not?

ANo, the proposal does not directly address or legalize tokenized stocks. The SEC framed it as an equity market structure measure, not a crypto or blockchain rule. Tokenized stock platforms would still need to satisfy numerous other securities-law requirements, including exchange, broker-dealer, and custody rules.

QWhat are the next steps for this SEC proposal before any rule change becomes final?

AThe proposal will be open for a 60-day public comment period after publication in the Federal Register. The SEC must then review comments and could revise, narrow, or abandon parts of the proposal before adopting any final rule.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Miners Advised Not to Buy GPUs for AI and to Focus on Infrastructure

A founder at an energy investment forum advises bitcoin miners not to purchase GPUs for AI themselves, but to instead focus on infrastructure like power and data center space. Mike Alfred of Alpine Fox stated that while AI infrastructure demand is a long-term, 20-30 year trend, it presents a key choice for miners. The first, riskier model involves owning and operating GPUs, which requires financing expensive hardware that quickly becomes obsolete. The second, more conservative model is akin to real estate: providing colocation services where clients bring their own servers, and the miner sells space, power, cooling, and water. Alfred noted this model is easier to finance. Most existing bitcoin mining sites are difficult and expensive to convert for AI, as AI data centers require far higher construction costs, redundant fiber connections, backup power, complex cooling, and near 100% uptime. A hybrid model, where mining acts as a flexible load to use excess power during AI data center construction or from generation facilities, was discussed. However, participants concluded this is only viable with very cheap power; otherwise, developers are better off focusing solely on AI. Miners are increasingly being evaluated for their available power capacity and project portfolios rather than just bitcoin output. Panelists also warned of risks in the AI sector, predicting at least one major default or contract breach among AI tenants, lenders, or landlords before bitcoin's next halving in 2028.

cryptonews.ruHace 4 min(s)

Miners Advised Not to Buy GPUs for AI and to Focus on Infrastructure

cryptonews.ruHace 4 min(s)

Millisecond 'Pay-to-Cut': How Did Hyperliquid's Priority Fee Turn into a Multi-Million Dollar Business?

"Millisecond 'Paid Queue-Jumping': How Hyperliquid's Priority Fee Became a Multi-Million Dollar Annual Business" In traditional finance, high-frequency trading firms spend millions on infrastructure for millisecond advantages. Hyperliquid has translated this race onto the blockchain with its "Priority Fee" system, creating an open economic game for speed. This system auctions two types of priority: **Gossip Priority** for faster data feeds (via a Dutch auction every 3 minutes), and **Order Priority** for front-of-queue trade execution (users bid a fee for lower latency). This converts a hardware race into a transparent, market-priced mechanism. Since launch, this feature has generated over $5M in protocol revenue. Projected annualized buybacks from this income exceed $30M, accounting for ~7% of total protocol revenue. The demand stems from large traders and market makers on Hyperliquid, for whom milliseconds can mean the difference between profit/loss or avoiding liquidation. Market makers pay these fees as "protection" to ensure their orders execute first, which in turn improves liquidity for all users. Crucially, Hyperliquid internalizes Maximum Extractable Value (MEV) that typically leaks to external validators or searchers, creating a new revenue stream beyond trading fees. The mechanism also strengthens HYPE's tokenomics. While 97% of trading fees fund secondary market buybacks (via the Assistance Fund), Priority Fees are **directly burned**, adding a second deflationary engine. Furthermore, fees for order priority are deducted from users' undelegated HYPE balances, encouraging large traders to hold and lock up tokens, reducing circulating supply. However, a key challenge remains: balancing the speed needs of institutional players with fair market access for retail users, as those who cannot pay high fees may suffer worse slippage during volatility. In summary, Hyperliquid's Priority Fee is a novel model that monetizes latency, captures MEV for the protocol, and enhances its native token's value through burning and lock-ups.

marsbitHace 9 min(s)

Millisecond 'Pay-to-Cut': How Did Hyperliquid's Priority Fee Turn into a Multi-Million Dollar Business?

marsbitHace 9 min(s)

The Truth Behind Digital Banking: The Fragile Ecosystem Supporting 1.46 Billion Users

The article "The Truth About Digital Banks: The Fragile Ecosystem Behind 1.46 Billion Users" provides a data-driven analysis of the digital banking sector based on a verified list of 368 active neobanks as of July 2026. While these platforms collectively serve 1.46 billion users, with Asia (817 million users) and institutions like WeBank and Nubank dominating the landscape, the sector faces significant structural vulnerabilities. A key finding is that only 127 of the 368 neobanks hold full banking licenses. The majority operate atop third-party infrastructure providers like Banking-as-a-Service (BaaS) platforms, creating systemic risk where the failure of a single provider, as seen in past cases like Wirecard and Synapse, can jeopardize multiple consumer brands. Furthermore, the industry experiences a steady, quiet stream of failures, mergers, and shutdowns that often go unreported. The analysis also examines the adoption of artificial intelligence (AI), finding only 67 platforms (18%) have deployed AI at scale, with many innovators based in emerging markets like Nigeria and the Philippines. The infrastructure layer is highly concentrated, with 106 providers supporting the entire ecosystem of 368 consumer-facing brands. The article concludes with three predictions: the unlicensed gap will close through acquisitions or exits; an AI credit model is likely to fail in the next economic downturn; and a nascent but significant trend is the emergence of financial services designed for AI agents rather than humans.

marsbitHace 25 min(s)

The Truth Behind Digital Banking: The Fragile Ecosystem Supporting 1.46 Billion Users

marsbitHace 25 min(s)

Digital Asset Trading Platform Uphold Cuts 17% of Global Workforce Amid 'Crypto Winter'

Cryptocurrency trading platform Uphold has laid off approximately 17% of its global workforce, affecting 85 full-time employees and contractors. The cuts are part of a strategic shift to reallocate resources towards its rapidly growing corporate services business, as retail cryptocurrency trading activity has declined amid the ongoing market downturn. CEO Simon McLaughlin stated the company is restructuring after years of significant growth and remains confident in the long-term prospects of digital assets and blockchain technology. Founded in 2015, Uphold offers trading and custody services for cryptocurrencies, fiat, stocks, and precious metals. It has recently expanded to provide infrastructure for banks, fintech firms, and broker-dealers to integrate crypto services. The layoffs occur against a backdrop of a prolonged crypto market slump, with total market capitalization falling to around $2.1 trillion by Q2 2024. Factors include weakened trading volumes, reduced retail participation, interest rate hikes, geopolitical uncertainty, and net outflows from U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs. Uphold clarified it is not shutting down its UK operations or any international offices. The company highlighted strong growth in its corporate platform and announced plans to evolve its consumer app into a broader blockchain-based financial assistant by 2026, offering U.S. stocks, tokenized securities, lending, credit cards, and DeFi yield opportunities.

cryptonews.ruHace 25 min(s)

Digital Asset Trading Platform Uphold Cuts 17% of Global Workforce Amid 'Crypto Winter'

cryptonews.ruHace 25 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片