SEC and CFTC signal execution phase for crypto regulation at harmonization meeting

ambcryptoPublicado a 2026-01-29Actualizado a 2026-01-29

Resumen

US financial regulators, the SEC and CFTC, have announced a shift from coordination to execution in crypto regulation. At a harmonization meeting, officials outlined plans to advance joint rulemaking using existing authority, without waiting for final legislation from Congress. A key initiative, "Project Crypto," aims to create a shared taxonomy for crypto assets, clarify jurisdictional boundaries, and reduce regulatory duplication and uncertainty. The CFTC stated that most crypto assets are not securities, marking a departure from past ambiguity. Planned rulemaking covers tokenized collateral, onshore crypto perpetual derivatives, retail leveraged trading, and treatment of software in DeFi. The goal is to provide regulatory clarity and reduce friction while maintaining market integrity.

US financial regulators signalled a shift from coordination to execution on crypto oversight on Thursday, 29 January.

Senior officials from the Securities and Exchange Commission [SEC] and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission [CFTC] outlined plans to advance joint rulemaking using existing authority.

The remarks came during a rescheduled SEC–CFTC harmonization meeting, where both agencies emphasised regulatory clarity, reduced duplication, and a more coordinated approach to overseeing crypto asset markets.

Regulators move beyond coordination rhetoric

Speaking at the event, Michael S. Selig said the CFTC would begin exercising oversight of the crypto market without waiting for Congress to finalize market structure legislation.

He described the moment as a transition toward implementation. Staff have been directed to draft rules and revisit existing proposals that have contributed to regulatory uncertainty.

Selig said the CFTC would work jointly with the SEC on “Project Crypto.” This is a framework aimed at harmonizing oversight across agencies.

The initiative is designed to establish a shared crypto asset taxonomy. Also, it is to clarify jurisdictional boundaries and reduce overlapping compliance requirements.

Joint taxonomy and jurisdictional clarity

A central focus of the meeting was developing a common classification framework for digital assets. Selig said he agreed with Paul S. Atkins that most crypto assets trading today are not securities.

This position would mark a departure from years of regulatory ambiguity.

Selig added that CFTC staff have been instructed to work with their SEC counterparts on the joint codification of a crypto asset taxonomy as an interim measure. At the same time, Congress continues to work on broader legislation.

The aim, he said, is to draw clearer jurisdictional lines and avoid leaving market participants “trapped in uncertainty.”

Rulemaking plans span derivatives, collateral, and software

Beyond taxonomy, Selig outlined several areas where the CFTC plans to move forward with rulemaking.

These include developing rules to support the use of tokenised collateral, creating pathways to onshore perpetual crypto derivatives. Also, the rule will clarify the treatment of leveraged and margined retail crypto trading.

He also announced plans to withdraw earlier proposals that restricted certain event contracts and to begin rulemaking on prediction markets.

In addition, the CFTC will explore whether innovation exemptions or safe harbours are appropriate for software developers and non-custodial systems operating in the decentralized finance space.

Harmonization aimed at reducing regulatory friction

Both agencies framed harmonization as a practical exercise rather than a blurring of statutory boundaries.

Selig said substituted compliance and aligned requirements could allow firms to operate more efficiently without compromising market integrity. This is particularly as crypto markets span products traditionally overseen by different regulators.

While recent congressional action has advanced market structure legislation, regulators stressed that the execution phase would proceed independently, using existing authorities to modernise oversight as innovation continues.


Final Thoughts

  • US regulators signalled a move from coordination to implementation, with the SEC and CFTC outlining concrete steps toward joint crypto rulemaking.
  • Planned actions span asset classification, derivatives, tokenised collateral, and software treatment, indicating regulatory execution will move ahead of final legislation.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat was the main shift signaled by US financial regulators regarding crypto oversight on January 29?

AUS financial regulators signaled a shift from coordination to execution on crypto oversight, with the SEC and CFTC outlining plans to advance joint rulemaking using existing authority.

QWhat is the name of the joint framework mentioned for harmonizing crypto oversight between the SEC and CFTC?

AThe joint framework is called 'Project Crypto', aimed at harmonizing oversight, establishing a shared crypto asset taxonomy, clarifying jurisdictional boundaries, and reducing overlapping compliance requirements.

QAccording to Michael S. Selig, what is the classification of most crypto assets trading today?

AMichael S. Selig agreed that most crypto assets trading today are not securities, which marks a departure from years of regulatory ambiguity.

QWhat are some specific areas where the CFTC plans to move forward with rulemaking?

AThe CFTC plans to develop rules for tokenised collateral, create pathways to onshore perpetual crypto derivatives, clarify treatment of leveraged and margined retail crypto trading, withdraw earlier proposals restricting certain event contracts, and begin rulemaking on prediction markets.

QHow do the agencies view harmonization in the context of crypto regulation?

ABoth agencies framed harmonization as a practical exercise aimed at reducing regulatory friction, allowing firms to operate more efficiently without compromising market integrity, through substituted compliance and aligned requirements.

Lecturas Relacionadas

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手Hace 1 hora(s)

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手Hace 1 hora(s)

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbitHace 3 hora(s)

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手Hace 5 hora(s)

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手Hace 5 hora(s)

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbitHace 6 hora(s)

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

marsbitHace 6 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片