SEC Crypto Task Force Receives New Submissions on Self-Custody and DeFi Rules

TheNewsCryptoPublicado em 2026-01-21Última atualização em 2026-01-21

Resumo

The U.S. SEC Crypto Task Force has received two new public submissions addressing key regulatory issues in digital assets, including self-custody rights and DeFi oversight. One submission, referencing Louisiana’s HB 488 law, advocates for federal crypto market regulations that include registration requirements, transparency, and anti-fraud measures, while cautioning against overly broad exemptions. Another, from the Blockchain Association, requests SEC guidance on whether entities involved in tokenized equity and DeFi trading should be classified as dealers under the Securities Exchange Act, suggesting adaptations to traditional broker-dealer frameworks for smart contract-based trading. These inputs come amid ongoing congressional negotiations on the CLARITY Act, which seeks to clarify digital asset regulations, with industry stakeholders actively engaging in the debate around investor protection and innovation.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Crypto Task Force has received two new written submissions to its public input page, which have once again highlighted important issues in digital asset regulation, such as self-custody rights and the regulatory status of decentralised finance (DeFi).

One of the proposals, from a Louisiana resident named DK Willard, references the Louisiana HB 488 law, which protects the state’s residents’ right to control their own digital assets. The proposal states that the upcoming federal law on the structure of the crypto market should contain proper registration requirements, transparency, and robust anti-fraud and anti-manipulation provisions. The proposal warns that too wide-reaching exemptions at the federal level could permit developers or platforms to circumvent investor protections.

The second observation is from the Blockchain Association Trading Firm Working Group, which urges the SEC to issue guidance on whether firms engaging in tokenized equity and DeFi trading on their own behalf should or should not be considered dealers subject to registration under the Securities Exchange Act. The comment suggests that the conventional broker-dealer framework applicable in traditional markets may need to be adapted to accommodate smart contract settlement and trading without necessarily requiring dealer registration.

These comments were posted on the SEC’s “Written Input” page for the Crypto Task Force, which is intended to allow stakeholders to share their views that may help shape the federal approach to digital assets.

Context Within Ongoing Regulatory Debate

The timing of these new filings is as Congress is in the middle of negotiations on the federal crypto market structure bill, known as the CLARITY Act, which aims to provide clarity on the regulatory framework and update investor protection regulations for digital assets. There have been debates among industry participants and regulators on matters such as stablecoin regulation, DeFi liquidity, and innovation vs. regulation.

A senior crypto advisor to the White House, Patrick Witt, has urged a compromise in order to move the CLARITY Act in a period of time in which the Republican Party controls both the House of Representatives and the Senate, and in which the Trump administration is still in power. Industry leaders, such as Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong, have been part of the process.

The recent filings with the SEC Crypto Task Force indicate the ongoing interest of the industry in federal regulation of digital assets, in particular with respect to self-custody rights and the nature of DeFi trading activity. As federal legislative development progresses and various parties make their voices heard, these perspectives may inform how regulatory frameworks balance investor protection and innovation.

Highlighted Crypto News:

Galaxy Digital Bets on Balanced Strategy With New $100M Crypto-Linked Hedge Fund

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat are the two main issues highlighted in the new submissions to the SEC Crypto Task Force?

AThe two main issues highlighted are self-custody rights and the regulatory status of decentralized finance (DeFi).

QWhich state law was referenced in the proposal from DK Willard, and what right does it protect?

AThe proposal referenced Louisiana HB 488 law, which protects the state's residents' right to control their own digital assets.

QWhat does the Blockchain Association Trading Firm Working Group urge the SEC to provide guidance on?

AIt urges the SEC to issue guidance on whether firms engaging in tokenized equity and DeFi trading on their own behalf should be considered dealers subject to registration under the Securities Exchange Act.

QWhat is the name of the federal crypto market structure bill currently being negotiated in Congress?

AThe federal crypto market structure bill is called the CLARITY Act.

QAccording to the article, what is the White House senior crypto advisor Patrick Witt urging to help move the CLARITY Act forward?

APatrick Witt is urging a compromise to move the CLARITY Act forward during a period of Republican control of both the House and Senate and while the Trump administration is still in power.

Leituras Relacionadas

The Impossible Trilemma Is Basically a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that the core limitation of blockchain technology is not the scalability trilemma, but its fundamental lack of privacy, which acts as a barrier to institutional capital. It defines blockchain as a slow, expensive, shared computer whose primary value is "permissionlessness" (no administrator) and verifiable trust. While this is ideal for native financial assets like stable币, which now process trillions, two critical flaws remain for mainstream adoption: regulatory legitimacy and a default transparency that leaks all financial activity. The author contends that transparency is not a feature but a tax, quantified through MEV extraction, making the public ledger unusable for serious institutions. However, modern cryptography, specifically zero-knowledge proofs, now offers a solution: "provable privacy." This allows users to prove compliance (e.g., solvency, KYC) without revealing underlying data. This fusion of privacy and auditability resolves the transparency-compliant privacy-compliance dichotomy, enabling a purely upgraded system where transactions are verified but not broadcasted. Closing these flaws is presented as the essential bridge to onboard the next wave of trillions in capital.

marsbitHá 8h

The Impossible Trilemma Is Basically a Pseudo-Problem

marsbitHá 8h

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Há 8h

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手Há 8h

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.

marsbitHá 10h

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbitHá 10h

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Há 11h

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

链捕手Há 11h

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?

marsbitHá 12h

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

marsbitHá 12h

Trading

Spot

Futuros