SEC says most crypto assets are not securities in new regulatory framework

ambcryptoPublicado em 2026-03-17Última atualização em 2026-03-17

Resumo

The U.S. SEC, in coordination with the CFTC, issued new guidance on March 17, 2026, clarifying that most crypto assets are not securities. The framework introduces a taxonomy classifying digital assets into five categories: digital commodities, collectibles, tools, stablecoins, and digital securities. It emphasizes that a crypto asset itself may not be a security, even if involved in an investment contract, and that its regulatory status can change over time. The guidance also addresses staking, airdrops, mining, and asset wrapping, reducing uncertainty for market participants. This move signals improved regulatory alignment between the SEC and CFTC, providing clearer rules for builders, issuers, and investors.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has issued a sweeping new interpretation clarifying how federal securities laws apply to crypto assets, stating that most crypto assets are not themselves securities.

Announced on 17 March 2026, the guidance marks one of the most significant regulatory developments in the U.S. crypto market in over a decade.

The move was issued in coordination with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, signaling a more unified approach to overseeing digital assets.

SEC Chairman Paul Atkins said the interpretation aims to “draw clear lines in clear terms,” while acknowledging that earlier regulatory approaches had failed to provide sufficient clarity for market participants.

SEC introduces crypto asset taxonomy

At the center of the new framework is a formal classification system for digital assets. The SEC outlined five broad categories:

  • Digital commodities
  • Digital collectibles
  • Digital tools
  • Stablecoins
  • Digital securities

The taxonomy is designed to help market participants better understand how different types of crypto assets are treated under U.S. law, addressing a long-standing lack of consistent definitions across the industry.

Investment contracts can evolve—and end

A key element of the interpretation is the clarification that a crypto asset itself may not be a security, even if it is involved in an investment contract at some stage.

The SEC stated that a “non-security crypto asset” can become subject to securities laws through an investment contract, but that such arrangements can also cease over time.

This distinction introduces a more dynamic view of regulation, where an asset’s legal status may change depending on how it is offered, marketed, and used.

Clarity on staking, airdrops, and mining

The guidance also addresses several core crypto activities that have previously existed in regulatory grey areas.

These include:

  • Airdrops
  • Protocol mining
  • Protocol staking
  • The wrapping of non-security crypto assets

By outlining how securities laws apply to these activities, the SEC is attempting to reduce uncertainty for developers, platforms, and users operating across decentralized networks.

SEC and CFTC align on oversight

The joint nature of the interpretation highlights growing coordination between the SEC and the CFTC, which have historically taken different approaches to crypto regulation.

CFTC Chairman Michael S. Selig said the guidance reflects a shared commitment to creating “workable, harmonized regulations” for the industry.

The alignment is expected to clarify jurisdictional boundaries, particularly between assets treated as commodities and those subject to securities laws.

Market implications

The interpretation is likely to have wide-ranging implications for the crypto industry.

For builders and issuers, the framework provides clearer guidance on structuring projects and token distributions. For investors, it offers greater transparency around how assets may be classified and regulated.

The SEC said the interpretation also serves as a bridge as Congress continues its efforts to establish a comprehensive framework for the crypto market through legislation.


Final Summary

  • The SEC has clarified that most crypto assets are not securities, introducing a formal taxonomy and addressing long-standing regulatory uncertainty.
  • The joint guidance with the CFTC signals a more coordinated and flexible approach to crypto oversight in the United States.

Perguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the main clarification provided by the SEC regarding crypto assets in the new framework?

AThe SEC clarified that most crypto assets are not themselves securities.

QOn what date was this significant regulatory guidance announced?

AThe guidance was announced on 17 March 2026.

QWhat are the five broad categories in the SEC's new classification system for digital assets?

AThe five categories are: Digital commodities, Digital collectibles, Digital tools, Stablecoins, and Digital securities.

QAccording to the guidance, can a crypto asset's legal status change over time?

AYes, the guidance states that an asset's legal status may change depending on how it is offered, marketed, and used, and that an investment contract arrangement can cease over time.

QWhich other U.S. regulatory agency did the SEC coordinate with to issue this joint interpretation?

AThe SEC issued the guidance in coordination with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

Leituras Relacionadas

a16z: From Companies to DAOs, DUNA May Become the Next Generation Organizational Form

This article, "From Companies to DAOs: How DUNA Could Become the Next Organizational Form," traces the 500-year evolution of business collaboration. It begins with medieval structures like the *commenda* and Florentine *compagnia*, which exposed partners to personal risk. The modern corporation, exemplified by the Dutch East India Company (VOC), was a revolutionary leap, enabling large-scale, capital-intensive ventures by offering limited liability and reducing coordination costs. However, corporations introduced new challenges like principal-agent problems and bureaucratic overhead. The piece argues that software and internet-native protocols are now reducing these traditional overheads. Decentralized Autonomous Organizations (DAOs) emerged as a new model for coordination without centralized management. Yet, DAOs face a significant legal vacuum: they lack legal recognition, leaving members exposed to unlimited personal liability, and their tokens are vulnerable to being classified as securities under unclear regulations (e.g., the Howey Test). This has forced projects into suboptimal workarounds like offshore foundations. The article identifies the Decentralized Unincorporated Nonprofit Association (DUNA) as a potential solution. Recently legalized in states like Wyoming, the DUNA provides a legal wrapper for decentralized networks. It grants key protections—legal personality, limited liability, and perpetual existence—to a group without imposing a traditional hierarchical management structure. This allows token-holder communities to govern, hold assets, and contract as a single legal entity, aligning with their decentralized nature. While DUNA doesn't solve all governance challenges or magically resolve securities law questions, it represents a crucial step. It fills the legal recognition gap, offering a native legal form for internet-scale, decentralized collaboration and extending the separation of personal risk from organizational venture into a new domain.

marsbitHá 1m

a16z: From Companies to DAOs, DUNA May Become the Next Generation Organizational Form

marsbitHá 1m

2026 Mid-Year Report On-Chain RWA: Tokenized Stock Market Cap Doubles in a Year, But 90% of Rights Are Hollow Shells

The 2026 Mid-Year Report on On-Chain RWA highlights a significant growth in tokenized stock market capitalization, which nearly doubled from $951 million in March to $1.89 billion by July. However, the report reveals a fundamental contradiction in this "layer 2.5" ecosystem: products with the strongest legal foundation (like regulated U.S. infrastructure) lack liquidity and distribution, while freely tradable offshored wrapper products often lack substantive ownership rights. The increase is driven largely by a few products (SECZ, FGRS, STRCx) and platforms (Ondo, xStocks, Securitize collectively hold over 85% share). While distributed value across networks like Ethereum, Solana, and BNB Chain has grown, the market remains fragmented. Products referencing the same underlying asset (e.g., Apple stock) are distinct legal liabilities with different intermediaries and jurisdictional rules, offering varying degrees of legal claim. The report cautions that headline numbers are misleading, as they reflect changes in distributed token value—driven by issuance, conversions, and price movements—not pure investor inflows. True "canonical shares" with legal ownership, wide wallet distribution, institutional liquidity, and independent on-chain price discovery do not yet exist at scale. Tokenized treasuries show stronger product-market fit, and ETFs may be easier to scale than single stocks. The core takeaway is a trade-off: legal certainty versus liquidity and composability.

marsbitHá 50m

2026 Mid-Year Report On-Chain RWA: Tokenized Stock Market Cap Doubles in a Year, But 90% of Rights Are Hollow Shells

marsbitHá 50m

Coldcard Hardware Wallet Hacked: 594 Bitcoin Withdrawn in 25 Minutes

The Coldcard hardware wallet has been compromised, with hackers stealing approximately 594.5 Bitcoin (~$40 million) from 500 addresses in just 25 minutes. The root cause was a critical software bug, undetected for five years, which disabled the device's secure chip for generating true random numbers. This led to the creation of private keys based on predictable data like the processor's serial number, drastically reducing cryptographic security. The attackers exploited this offline by brute-forcing possible seed phrases, finding active addresses on the public ledger, and signing transactions. Initially, Coinkite (Coldcard's maker) claimed only older models were at risk but later admitted all devices running the compromised firmware were vulnerable. CEO Rodolphe Novak (NVK) apologized but ruled out financial compensation for affected users. To secure funds, owners must urgently update their firmware to specific safe versions, generate a completely new seed phrase on the updated device, and transfer all assets to new addresses created with that new seed. While a BIP-39 passphrase can help, it does not replace this migration process. Other Coinkite products like TAPSIGNER were not affected. This incident underscores that even specialized hardware requires rigorous, independent code audits, especially for cryptographic functions. It parallels past failures, like a 2006 OpenSSL bug in Debian, and raises questions about whether automated code analysis can ever fully replace human scrutiny in critical security areas.

cryptonews.ruHá 3h

Coldcard Hardware Wallet Hacked: 594 Bitcoin Withdrawn in 25 Minutes

cryptonews.ruHá 3h

Trading

Spot
活动图片