U.S. SEC Clears 'Dealer' Rule Expansion That Could Rope in DeFi

CoinDeskPolicyОпубликовано 2024-02-05Обновлено 2024-02-06

Введение

The Securities and Exchange Commission approved a final rule Tuesday that DeFi interests call "hostile" to that sector, potentially requiring projects to register as dealers.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) widened its definition of a dealer today to pull many more financial operations into its jurisdiction – including, as it warned in a footnote of its original proposal – those dealing in crypto securities.

"The commission is not excluding any particular type of securities, including crypto asset securities, from the application of the final rules," according to the SEC's description. "The dealer framework is a functional analysis based on the securities trading activities undertaken by a person, not the type of security being traded."

The dealer rule is among several crypto-tied regulatory efforts that had been pending at the SEC and other agencies, including the Internal Revenue Service. While it drew less attention than IRS tax measures and the SEC proposals weighing expansion of the exchange definition and restricting crypto custody, the move could have serious consequences in the digital assets industry – particularly in decentralized finance (DeFi).

Advertisement
Advertisement

"Absent an exemption or exception, if anyone trades in a manner consistent with de facto market making, it must register with us as a dealer – consistent with Congress’s intent,” SEC Chair Gary Gensler said in a statement.

The text of the rule noted the extensive objections and stated confusions of crypto industry insiders, including those in DeFi.

"While some commenters stated that the proposed rules should not apply to so called DeFi, whether there is a dealer involved in any particular transaction or structure (whether or not referred to as so-called DeFi) is a facts and circumstances analysis," the agency noted. "There is nothing about the technology used, including distributed ledger technology based protocols using smart contracts, that would preclude crypto asset securities activities from falling within the scope of dealer activity."

The commission did consider a crypto carve-out, according to the document, but decided that would have "negative competitive effects" by giving crypto firms an advantage over those who have to register.

While this effort – which goes into full effect in April of next year – was largely targeted at electronic participants in the U.S. Treasuries market, the requirements will be the same for any business roped into the expanded definition. A dealer must register with the SEC, comply with securities laws and join an industry-backed self-regulatory organization.

As the crypto industry has often argued, many DeFi operations could find it impossible to register or maintain compliance with SEC demands.

Advertisement
Advertisement

SEC Commissioners Mark Uyeda and Hester Peirce opposed the rule on Tuesday.

"Under the Commission’s approach, any person can be a 'dealer' if they buy and sell securities as part of a regular business," Uyeda said, arguing that the change is "creating additional regulatory confusion for other markets, including crypto asset securities."

"Not surprisingly, the rule reflects little thought regarding its practical application in the crypto markets," noted Peirce, who has for years called for the agency to establish tailored regulations for crypto.

The DeFi Education Fund was among crypto groups that objected to the original proposal. The group called Tuesday's final version "misguided and unworkable."

"The SEC not only failed to confront the substance of our concerns but also failed altogether to articulate any discernible path to compliance for DeFi market participants," the organization said in a statement. "Imposing obligations on entities in the DeFi ecosystem that cannot be complied with is wrong, impractical, and hostile to innovation."

The crypto industry has been fighting with the regulator in federal courts over which cryptocurrencies meet the definition of a security that the SEC would have authority over. The outcome of that legal battle could have major implications in the debate over which firms count as dealers under this latest regulatory demand.

Advertisement
Advertisement

Похожее

Can You Make a Steady Profit by Blindly Following Polymarket's Pre-Game Win Probability to Bet on NBA Games?

**Can You Consistently Profit by Blindly Following Pre-Game Win Probabilities on Polymarket for NBA Games?** A backtest of the entire NBA 2025-26 regular season (1,096 games) was conducted to test the strategy of always betting $100 on the team with the higher pre-game win probability on Polymarket. The results show that this strategy is not profitable. The total amount wagered was $109,600, with a return of $107,545.20, resulting in a net loss of $2,054 and a Return on Investment (ROI) of -1.87%. This indicates that the market is highly efficient, and pre-game probabilities are accurately priced, leaving no simple arbitrage opportunity. In fact, blindly following the market would have been slightly less profitable than betting against it. However, a deeper analysis by team revealed significant differences. Certain teams consistently outperformed market expectations when they were favored to win: * Portland Trail Blazers (POR): 19% ROI * Philadelphia 76ers (PHI): 14% ROI * San Antonio Spurs (SAS): 12% ROI * Los Angeles Lakers (LAL): 11% ROI * Charlotte Hornets (CHA): 9% ROI In contrast, the market was highly efficient for the top-performing teams, offering minimal returns (e.g., Boston Celtics ROI: 4%, Denver Nuggets ROI: -5%). Results for the weakest teams were too inconsistent due to small sample sizes. The key finding is that team-specific factors, rather than the probability percentage itself, drive potential value, making a one-size-fits-all strategy ineffective.

Odaily星球日报1 мин. назад

Can You Make a Steady Profit by Blindly Following Polymarket's Pre-Game Win Probability to Bet on NBA Games?

Odaily星球日报1 мин. назад

Are Altcoins Soaring? Is the Bull Market Back?

Recent days have seen significant volatility in altcoins while Bitcoin remained relatively stable. Some low-market-cap tokens, with circulations under $20 million, surged by several hundred percent within days—without fundamental improvements, ecosystem breakthroughs, or new institutional inflows. This is not a true altseason. The Altseason Index stands at 34, and Bitcoin dominance is at 58.5%, indicating the market is still in a "Bitcoin season." The altcoin market cap has shrunk by ~40% since its peak in December 2024, falling to around $700 billion. This severe decline has made it cheaper for large holders to accumulate significant portions of circulating supply, enabling price manipulation. A case in point is SIREN, where a single entity allegedly controlled up to 88% of the circulating supply. Such concentration allows a small group to dictate price movements. Additionally, deeply negative funding rates (as low as -0.3% every 8 hours, annualized to -328%) force short sellers to pay high fees, accelerating liquidations and further fueling upward price spikes. On-chain activity, like a 97% weekly increase in BSC DEX volume, suggests excitement, but it is largely driven by existing capital, not new inflows. Institutional flows into altcoin ETFs (like those for Solana and XRP) have been weak or negative, indicating caution rather than rotation into altcoins. This rally is a signal of structural fragility, not broad bullish momentum. Until Bitcoin dominance falls significantly and new capital enters the altcoin space, these pumps are echoes of manipulation—not the return of a true bull market.

marsbit36 мин. назад

Are Altcoins Soaring? Is the Bull Market Back?

marsbit36 мин. назад

Торговля

Спот
Фьючерсы
活动图片