Most Crypto Assets Confirmed As Non-Securities By SEC And CFTC In New Guidance

bitcoinistPublished on 2026-03-17Last updated on 2026-03-17

Abstract

In a significant regulatory development, the US SEC and CFTC have issued joint guidance clarifying that the majority of crypto assets are not securities. This long-awaited move aims to end over a decade of uncertainty by providing a clear framework for digital tokens under federal securities laws. The guidance establishes a detailed taxonomy, categorizing assets as digital commodities, collectibles, tools, stablecoins, or securities. It explains how token classification can change over time and addresses the application of securities rules to activities like airdrops, staking, and mining. Both agencies encourage market participants to review the interpretation to understand regulatory jurisdiction.

The US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) on Tuesday issued joint guidance that clarifies how federal securities laws apply to many crypto assets, a move aimed at ending years of regulatory uncertainty.

The agencies said the interpretation makes clear that the bulk of digital tokens are not securities, while laying out how certain transactions and token evolutions can bring them within, or remove them from, securities regulation.

Clarity After A Decade Of Crypto Uncertainty

In the official release, the SEC framed the guidance as a milestone in its effort to provide clearer rules for market participants and to complement ongoing Congressional work to codify a comprehensive market-structure framework.

“After more than a decade of uncertainty, this interpretation will provide market participants with a clear understanding of how the Commission treats crypto assets under federal securities laws,” SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins said.

Chair Atkins added that the interpretation recognizes something the previous administration did not fully acknowledge: most crypto assets are not securities.

The guidance also acknowledges that investment-contract status can end — a point Atkins said will help entrepreneurs and investors while Congress advances bipartisan market-structure legislation (CLARITY Act).

The CFTC joined the SEC’s interpretation and signaled it will administer the Commodity Exchange Act in a manner consistent with the SEC’s approach. Together, the agencies provided a more detailed taxonomy to help classify digital assets and the activities that surround them.

Fresh Classification Framework

Key elements of the interpretation include a structured token taxonomy that separates digital commodities, digital collectibles, digital tools, stablecoins, and digital securities.

This categorization is intended to reduce ambiguity about which regulatory regime applies to different types of tokens and, by extension, to the platforms and services that handle them.

The guidance also addresses the dynamic nature of token classification. It clarifies how a “non-security crypto asset” — defined as a crypto asset that is not itself a security — may become subject to securities rules, and how it may cease to be treated as an investment contract over time.

The interpretation further explains how federal securities laws apply to airdrops, protocol mining, protocol staking, and the practice of “wrapping” a non-security crypto asset. The statement concludes:

Market participants—from innovators and issuers to individual investors—should review this interpretation to better understand the regulatory jurisdiction between the SEC and CFTC. The interpretation will be published on SEC.gov and in the Federal Register.

The daily chart shows the total crypto market cap at $2.5 trillion. Source: TOTAL on TradingView.com

Featured image from OpenArt, chart from TradingView.com

Related Questions

QWhat is the main purpose of the joint guidance issued by the SEC and CFTC?

AThe joint guidance aims to end years of regulatory uncertainty by clarifying how federal securities laws apply to crypto assets, providing clear rules for market participants, and complementing ongoing Congressional work on market-structure legislation.

QAccording to the guidance, how are most crypto assets classified?

AThe guidance confirms that most crypto assets are not securities, providing a clear classification that separates them from digital securities under federal securities laws.

QWhat key elements are included in the new token taxonomy framework?

AThe new taxonomy framework categorizes digital assets into digital commodities, digital collectibles, digital tools, stablecoins, and digital securities to reduce ambiguity about which regulatory regime applies.

QHow does the guidance address the dynamic nature of token classification?

AIt clarifies how a non-security crypto asset may become subject to securities rules or cease to be treated as an investment contract over time, acknowledging that investment-contract status can change.

QWhat specific crypto-related activities does the interpretation explain in relation to federal securities laws?

AThe interpretation explains how federal securities laws apply to airdrops, protocol mining, protocol staking, and the practice of 'wrapping' a non-security crypto asset.

Related Reads

Apple Also Has to Pay Rent Now

Apple Pays Rent Too: The Two-Way Flow of "Traffic Tax" and "AI Capability Rent" Between Tech Giants For over two decades, Google has paid Apple an estimated $20 billion annually to remain the default search engine on Safari, a "traffic tax" for a critical user entry point. However, in 2026, the direction of this cash flow partially reversed. Apple agreed to pay Google roughly $1 billion per year to license its Gemini AI models, as Apple's own models reportedly struggled with complex tasks. This creates a unique dynamic: Apple acts as the "landlord" in the established search ecosystem, collecting rent from Google for access. Simultaneously, in the emerging AI arena, Apple becomes the "tenant," paying Google for access to cutting-edge AI capabilities it cannot currently match internally. While Apple claims its new models are "distilled" from Gemini outputs and contain "not a drop" of Google's original code, core dependencies remain. Its knowledge base is refined using Gemini's outputs, and its most powerful cloud model runs on Google's infrastructure. Apple has structured the deal as non-exclusive, allowing it to theoretically switch AI suppliers—a hedge against over-reliance. The future hinges on whether advanced AI models become a commodity (cheap and abundant) or remain a concentrated, scarce resource (expensive and controlled by few). Apple is betting on the former, leveraging its massive device ecosystem to be a powerful, choosy customer. If the latter proves true, its bargaining power could erode. This power dynamic is extending to developers. Apple, Google, and WeChat are all pushing for apps to expose their core functions as standardized "actions" or "intents" that their respective AI assistants (Siri, Gemini, WeChat AI) can directly call. The new scarce resource is no longer just app store visibility, but "being selected by the AI." The currency of "rent" has changed from a 30% revenue share to ceding control over how users interact with an app's functions.

marsbit1h ago

Apple Also Has to Pay Rent Now

marsbit1h ago

Missed the SpaceX IPO? WEEX's "First Trade Protection" Lets You Experience US Stock Trading Risk-Free.

With the excitement around SpaceX's recent public listing reigniting interest in the US stock market, Chinese investors face significant challenges accessing compliant and convenient trading channels following regulatory actions against major online brokers. This article explores the available options, highlighting their risks and limitations. Traditional paths for US stock investments remain problematic. Qualified Domestic Institutional Investor (QDII) and Listed Open-Ended Fund (LOF) products, while compliant, suffer from high fees, significant purchase premiums, and a very limited selection of assets. Small, unregulated offshore brokers pose substantial risks, including potential insolvency. While secure, VIP accounts at banks in Hong Kong or Singapore require high minimum deposits (often 1-2 million RMB) and in-person visits, placing them out of reach for most retail investors. The article positions cryptocurrency exchanges, specifically their TradFi (traditional finance on-chain) offerings, as a compelling alternative. Platforms like WEEX are noted for providing access to a wide range of US stocks and ETFs, including SpaceX (SPCXON), through tokenized assets. This method offers advantages such as a single account for both crypto and traditional assets, USDT-based settlement avoiding fiat complexities, flexible leverage, and robust risk management. To attract users, WEEX is promoting a "First Trade Guarantee" campaign. Running from June 15 to July 8 (UTC+8), it features a $30,000 prize pool. Users who trade $500 worth of US stock contracts can qualify for a guarantee on their first eligible trade: 100% loss coverage up to $30 or a 20% bonus on profits up to $30. The campaign is presented as a low-risk opportunity for both crypto natives and traditional investors to experience US stock trading.

marsbit1h ago

Missed the SpaceX IPO? WEEX's "First Trade Protection" Lets You Experience US Stock Trading Risk-Free.

marsbit1h ago

How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars

How Hard Is It to Make a Chip? A Division Error Cost $475 Million Chip expert Shi Kan, a researcher at the Chinese Academy of Sciences and a popular tech creator, explains the immense challenges of chip development. Chips are foundational to modern technology, but their creation is extraordinarily difficult. The journey from sand to a functional chip involves complex design and manufacturing, but a critical bottleneck is verification—ensuring the design works flawlessly before costly production. A single, undetected bug can have catastrophic consequences, as illustrated by the infamous 1994 Intel Pentium FDIV bug. A flaw in the floating-point division unit forced a recall costing $475 million. Unlike software, chips cannot be easily patched after manufacture, making "first-time success" paramount. However, industry surveys show only 24% of chip projects achieve this; over three-quarters require at least one costly re-spin due to design flaws. Verification has thus become the dominant phase, consuming up to 70% of the design cycle. The core challenge is a "verification impossible triangle" between high performance, good debuggability, and low cost. Exhaustively verifying a modern CPU core could take 15,000 years with software simulation, or 30 years with advanced hardware emulation—timeframes utterly impractical for development. Despite being essential, verification is often seen as unglamorous "dirty work," receiving less academic attention than fields like AI. Shi and his team are tackling this by developing an agile verification research framework called ENCORE, based on FPGA technology, to improve verification efficiency and debug capability. Beyond research, Shi engages in public science communication through long-form video content, aiming to demystify chip technology, AI, and computer science. He argues for the value of pursuing "hard and long-term" endeavors, whether in the meticulous world of chip verification or in creating substantive educational content, believing such sustained effort is likely the right path forward.

marsbit1h ago

How Difficult is Chip Making? A Division Error Costs 475 Million Dollars

marsbit1h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片