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

TheNewsCryptoОпубліковано о 2026-01-21Востаннє оновлено о 2026-01-21

Анотація

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

TagsDeFiSEC

Пов'язані питання

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.

Пов'язані матеріали

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

This article explains the three primary methods for Codex to interact with a computer, each with distinct use cases, permission boundaries, and trust levels. **1. Computer Use:** This offers the broadest access, allowing Codex to visually control and interact with the graphical user interface of authorized macOS/Windows apps, system settings, and even iOS simulators. It's ideal for tasks lacking APIs or structured tools, such as operating legacy software or multi-app workflows. However, it's the slowest method and has the widest permission scope, requiring careful supervision for sensitive actions. **2. Chrome Extension:** This grants Codex access to the user's logged-in Chrome browser state, including cookies, profiles, and open tabs. It's best for tasks requiring user identity across websites like Gmail, LinkedIn, Salesforce, or internal dashboards. Its key advantage is multi-tab control for complex workflows. While more powerful for browser-based tasks than Computer Use, it carries higher sensitivity as actions are performed under the user's identity. **3. In-App Browser:** This is a browser isolated within the Codex thread, separate from the user's personal browsing data. It excels in web development and debugging scenarios—previewing local servers, testing responsive layouts, or annotating designs directly on the page. Its isolation is a strength for development but a limitation for tasks requiring login sessions. The core principle is to choose the narrowest, safest, and most structured interface for the task. Use plugins or MCPs first, resort to visual control (Computer Use) only for GUI-dependent tasks, employ the Chrome extension for identity-reliant browser work, and prefer the In-App Browser for isolated development. **Appshots** are clarified as a fourth, complementary tool for *inputting* context—capturing a screenshot of a window to point Codex to something—rather than a method for Codex to *act*. Together, this layered approach highlights a key to AI agent productization: not granting unlimited permissions, but constraining them within clear boundaries for specific tasks while preserving user oversight.

marsbit49 хв тому

How Does Codex Use a Computer? Three Entry Points and Permission Boundaries

marsbit49 хв тому

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

For years, the semiconductor equipment industry followed an unwritten "iron rule": suppliers offered steep discounts for new tool introductions (Design-in) and faced consistent price pressure during repeat orders, especially during market downturns. This long-standing buyer's market dynamic is now being upended. Recently, SK Hynix's primary equipment suppliers have reportedly requested a 3-4% price *increase*, a nearly unprecedented move. This shift is driven by a severe supply-demand imbalance fueled by the AI compute boom. Securing equipment has become an urgent arms race as chipmakers' expansion speed dictates their ability to fulfill massive AI chip orders. Key areas feeling the strain include: **TCB (Thermal Compression Bonding) Equipment:** Demand is exploding, driven by the simultaneous needs of HBM4 memory stacking, AI chip Chip-on-Substrate (C2S), and logic Chiplet Chip-on-Wafer (C2W) packaging. Players like Hanmi Semiconductor, Hanwha Semitech, and ASMPT are receiving major orders. While hybrid bonding is seen as the future, TCB remains the pragmatic choice for HBM4 mass production, with its lifecycle extended by relaxed specifications and ongoing technological upgrades. **Test Equipment Bottlenecks:** Ironically, AI-driven shortages are now crippling test equipment manufacturing. Critical components like FPGAs, Driver ICs, and CPUs face severe shortages and extended lead times (up to 52 weeks for FPGAs), as AI data center and server vendors prioritize supply. This creates a paradoxical cycle: AI chip shortages drive fab expansion, which requires more test equipment, whose production is delayed because its key parts are diverted to make AI chips. The industry is entering a broad, AI-powered upcycle. SEMI forecasts global semiconductor equipment sales to hit a record $156 billion by 2027, fueled by investment in advanced logic/foundry, HBM-driven DRAM, and advanced packaging (like CoWoS). Major players like TSMC, SK Hynix, and Micron are aggressively ramping capital expenditure. In conclusion, leading equipment vendors are no longer just selling tools; they are selling the critical capability to deliver AI-era capacity. Pricing power is shifting decisively to those with indispensable technology in key process nodes like advanced logic, HBM, and advanced packaging, rewriting the industry's traditional power structure.

marsbit1 год тому

The "Iron Rule" of Chip Equipment Is Being Broken

marsbit1 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片