SEC reaffirms tokenized stocks must follow existing securities laws

ambcryptoDipublikasikan tanggal 2026-01-30Terakhir diperbarui pada 2026-01-30

Abstrak

The U.S. SEC reaffirmed that tokenized stocks must comply with existing federal securities laws, regardless of whether they are issued on-chain or off-chain. The regulator emphasized that all securities must be registered unless an exemption applies. Tokenized stocks fall into two categories: issuer-sponsored and third-party sponsored, each offering different rights and protections. Wall Street firms, including Citadel and JPMorgan, opposed broad exemptions for DeFi platforms handling tokenized securities, warning that such exemptions could undermine investor protection and cause market disruptions. They called for DeFi platforms to be regulated similarly to traditional financial institutions. Despite opposition from traditional finance, the DeFi sector has seen significant growth, with nearly 300,000 holders and total traded value approaching $1 billion. The industry continues to advocate for certain exemptions, and the final regulatory framework may reflect a compromise between these opposing views.

The U.S. regulator, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), has reiterated that tokenized securities are still securities and fall under federal securities law.

In a recent statement, the regulator clarified that whether a stock is issued off-chain or on-chain, it must still comply with the relevant laws.

“Regardless of its format, the Securities Act requires that every offer and sale of a security must be registered with the Commission unless an exemption from registration is available.”

The guidance further reiterated,

“Similarly, stock is an ‘equity security’ under the Securities Act and the Exchange Act regardless of its format.”

According to the watchdog, tokenized stocks fall into two categories. The first is issuer-sponsored, which transfers rights and protections to the holder, while the second is third-party sponsored on-chain stocks that offer varied ownership rights and protections.

Securitize, one of the issuers of tokenized securities, welcomed the move, stating that it is crucial for ‘scaling’ the sector.

“Clear frameworks like this are key to responsibly scaling tokenization.”

Wall Street opposes DeFi exemptions

The statement followed the recent meeting between the regulator and Wall Street firms on how to treat tokenized securities under the current legal regime.

According to an SEC memo, representatives from Citadel, JPMorgan Chase & Co., Cahill Gordon & Reindel, Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA), pressed against broad exemptions for on-chain stocks.

Referencing the October flash crash and Stream Finance collapse, the TradFi group warned,

“Broad exemptions for tokenized trading activities could undermine investor protection and lead to market disruptions.”

In fact, in a December letter, Citadel Securities called for similar regulation of DeFi platforms handling tokenized securities like their traditional counterparts.

The DeFi complex has been pushing for legal exemptions, claiming their platforms are disintermediated to warrant the legal responsibility.

In a recent meeting, SIFMA and its TradFi members pushed for a new classification of tokenized securities to enable more effective regulation.

The latest SEC statement reflects some of the concerns they raised. However, it does not address broader DeFi operations. This omission may be because issues related to tokenized securities are still under discussion within the CLARITY Act.

Tokenized stocks eye $1 billion

Even so, the collective DeFi players called Citadel Securities’ push and argument ‘bassless’ and ‘flawed.’

The industry may likely advocate for DeFi exemptions of some sort in the bill. It remains to be seen whether the final framework for tokenized securities will be a compromise between these two camps.

The sector has gained strong traction, with tokenized securities holders edging close to 300K users, representing a 100% growth in January alone. Additionally, the total value of traded on-chain stocks is teetering toward the $1 billion mark.


Final Thoughts

  • The U.S. SEC clarified that tokenized securities still fall under the current federal securities law
  • Wall Street pressed against a broad DeFi exemption in tokenized securities trading.

Pertanyaan Terkait

QWhat did the SEC reaffirm regarding tokenized stocks and existing securities laws?

AThe SEC reaffirmed that tokenized securities are still securities and must comply with existing federal securities laws, regardless of whether they are issued off-chain or on-chain.

QWhat are the two categories of tokenized stocks mentioned by the SEC?

AThe two categories are issuer-sponsored tokenized stocks, which transfer rights and protections to the holder, and third-party sponsored on-chain stocks, which offer varied ownership rights and protections.

QWhy did Wall Street firms oppose broad exemptions for tokenized securities trading?

AWall Street firms opposed broad exemptions because they believe it could undermine investor protection and lead to market disruptions, as evidenced by events like the October flash crash and Stream Finance collapse.

QWhat was the DeFi industry's response to Citadel Securities' call for similar regulation?

AThe DeFi industry called Citadel Securities' push and argument 'baseless' and 'flawed,' and they are likely to advocate for some form of DeFi exemptions in the bill.

QWhat growth metrics were highlighted for the tokenized securities sector in January?

AIn January alone, the number of tokenized securities holders grew by 100%, reaching nearly 300,000 users, and the total value of traded on-chain stocks is approaching the $1 billion mark.

Bacaan Terkait

The Impossible Triad Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

**Judul: Segitiga Mustahil Sebenarnya Masalah Palsu** Industri crypto telah membangun sistem kriptografi paling kuat, tetapi ironisnya gagal melindungi privasi keuangan pengguna. Setiap transaksi dan kepemilikan terpapar secara publik. Blokchain pada dasarnya adalah komputer bersama yang lambat dan mahal, yang nilainya terletak pada akses tanpa izin dan konsensus terdesentralisasi. Selama satu dekade, industri terobsesi dengan "trilema" skalabilitas, keamanan, dan desentralisasi. Namun, kendala sebenarnya yang menghalangi masuknya modal triliunan dolar justru adalah **legalitas** dan **privasi**. 1. **Legalitas:** Sifat tanpa izin menciptakan ketidakpastian hukum. Namun, perkembangan regulasi seperti Undang-Undang GENIUS di AS mulai memberikan kejelasan kerangka hukum. 2. **Privasi:** Transparansi rantai publik bukanlah fitur, melainkan **pajak**. Setiap posisi dan transaksi yang terbuka mengundang eksploitasi seperti MEV (Miner Extractable Value), yang telah menyedot miliaran dolar dari pengguna biasa. Modal institusional besar tidak akan pernah menempatkan neracanya di tempat yang bisa dibaca pesaing secara real-time. Solusinya bukan transparansi penuh atau penyembunyian total. Kriptografi modern memungkinkan **privasi yang patuh (compliant privacy)**. Kita dapat membuktikan suatu pernyataan (misalnya, kecukupan cadangan, kepatuhan KYC, transaksi bersih) tanpa membongkar data dasarnya. Audit dan kepatuhan tetap terjaga, tetapi kebocoran informasi dan "pajak transparansi" dihilangkan. Dengan menutup dua cacat ini—melalui kemajuan regulasi dan adopsi privasi yang dapat dibuktikan—blokchain akan mengalami peningkatan murni. Ia akan berubah dari "spreadsheet Google yang mahal dan terbuka" menjadi mesin bersama yang dapat dipercaya yang akhirnya dapat menjaga rahasia. Inilah jembatan yang akan membawa sistem keuangan bernilai triliunan dolar ke dalam dunia yang sebenarnya dirancang untuknya sejak awal.

marsbit6j yang lalu

The Impossible Triad Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

marsbit6j yang lalu

Chip Optik, Perluasan Kapasitas Produksi Secara Kolektif

Kebutuhan chip optik sedang melonjak, memicu gelombang ekspansi kapasitas global di seluruh rantai pasokan. Di AS, Coherent memperluas pabrik 6 inci InP di Texas dengan pendanaan pemerintah, didukung investasi strategis dari Nvidia. Nokia menambah kapasitas pengujian dan pengemasan chip fotonik. Di Jepang, JX Advanced Metals berinvestasi besar untuk meningkatkan produksi substrat InP hingga 7-10 kali lipat. Di Eropa, IQE dan Tower Semiconductor menyepakati kesepakatan pasokan wafer epitaksial InP jangka panjang, menandakan konvergensi antara platform silicon photonics dan material III-V. Di Cina, perusahaan seperti Suzhou Ray Technology (Soluxe) dan San'an Optoelectronics secara agresif memperluas produksi chip optik dan bahan baku seperti InP. Ekspansi ini didorong oleh permintaan bandwidth yang meledak dari pusat data AI, terlepas dari jalur arsitektur masa depan seperti CPO (Co-Packaged Optics). Laporan Morgan Stanley menekankan bahwa kebutuhan konten optik akan terus tumbuh, baik dengan modul pluggable tradisional, NPO, CPO, atau arsitektur hybrid. Berbagai rute sumber cahaya seperti SiPh + Laser CW, VCSEL, dan MicroLED diperkirakan akan hidup berdampingan untuk aplikasi jarak berbeda dalam pusat data. Pada dasarnya, ini adalah perlombaan kapasitas global di mana AS membangun kembali manufaktur domestik, Jepang menguasai bahan baku, Eropa mendorong integrasi heterogen, dan Cina dengan cepat mengembangkan rantai pasokan terintegrasi secara vertikal. Perlombaan senjata di era fotonik telah memasuki tahap intensif.

marsbit8j yang lalu

Chip Optik, Perluasan Kapasitas Produksi Secara Kolektif

marsbit8j yang lalu

1996 atau 1999? Ujian Pertama Wash adalah 'Bagaimana Melihat AI'

Artikel ini membahas dilema utama yang dihadapi ketua Federal Reserve terbaru, Christopher Warsh, dalam menanggapi ledakan AI. Inti persoalannya adalah apakah kemajuan AI saat ini mirip dengan situasi 1996 — di mana Alan Greenspan membiarkan ekonomi tumbuh tanpa menaikkan suku bunga karena percaya pada pertumbuhan produktivitas — atau lebih mirip 1999, ketika Greenspan akhirnya menaikkan suku bunga secara agresif untuk mencegah overheating ekonomi. Warsh cenderung pada pendekatan 1996, berargumen bahwa manfaat produktivitas AI membutuhkan waktu untuk terlihat dalam data resmi, dan menaikkan suku bunga terlalu dini justru dapat meredam pertumbuhan yang sebenarnya membantu menekan inflasi. Namun, konteks makroekonominya berbeda: tekanan tarif, defisit fiskal yang membesar, dan memudarnya manfaat globalisasi membuat risiko inflasi lebih tinggi daripada era 1990-an. Di sisi lain, kritikus seperti Austan Goolsbee dari Bank Sentral Chicago berpendapat bahwa ledakan AI yang sudah diantisipasi banyak orang justru dapat memicu kenaikan pengeluaran di muka, mendorong overheating ekonomi dan mengharuskan kenaikan suku bunga yang lebih tajam nantinya. Perdebatan ini mencerminkan perpecahan internal di Fed. Paradoks terakhir bagi Warsh adalah keinginannya untuk menghapus "forward guidance" (panduan kebijakan ke depan), suatu praktik yang justru dibuat pada 1999. Jika ekonomi memburuk, ia harus memilih antara menggunakan alat yang ingin dihapusnya atau menghadapi gejolak pasar akibat ketidakpastian. Jawaban atas semua ini bergantung pada penilaiannya: apakah kita berada di tahun 1996 atau 1999?

marsbit11j yang lalu

1996 atau 1999? Ujian Pertama Wash adalah 'Bagaimana Melihat AI'

marsbit11j yang lalu

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片