‘Wrong approach’ – Crypto lobby rejects Wall Street’s tighter DeFi rules for tokenized securities

ambcryptoОпубліковано о 2026-04-08Востаннє оновлено о 2026-04-08

Анотація

The Blockchain Association (BA) has strongly opposed a proposal from Citadel Securities and traditional finance (SIFMA) calling for stricter regulation of DeFi protocols that handle tokenized securities. In a letter to the SEC, the BA argued that applying existing securities laws, which are designed for intermediaries, to neutral decentralized infrastructure is the "wrong approach." While affirming that tokenized securities are still securities, the BA emphasized that the SEC should consider how modern blockchain technology works before regulating, rather than automatically classifying DeFi infrastructure as exchanges or brokers. This pushback aligns with earlier criticism from the DeFi Education Fund (DEF). Citadel and SIFMA, however, maintain that all platforms handling tokenized securities must be under regulatory oversight to ensure a level playing field and investor protection, regardless of whether they are custodial or decentralized. The outcome hinges on the SEC's decision, which could potentially be challenged in court if it is not codified by the CLARITY Act.

The DeFi sector is doubling down on its pushback against the Citadel-led call for barring decentralized protocols from blanket regulatory exemption.

In a letter to the U.S SEC on Monday, the Blockchain Association (BA) termed Citadel’s proposed regulation of DeFi protocols handling tokenized assets as a “wrong approach.”

The BA is an advocacy and an umbrella group with key industry members, including Coinbase. In the letter, the BA rebutted,

Securities laws regulate intermediaries. They do not automatically turn neutral infrastructure into an exchange, broker, or dealer simply because that infrastructure is part of a tokenized market.

The lobby group added that the DeFi sector is not after a “free pass.” However, it asked the SEC to consider how the underlying tech works before regulating any DeFi protocol.

The digital asset industry is not asking for a free pass. Tokenized securities are still securities. The question is whether the SEC will apply the law in a way that reflects how modern infrastructure actually works.

Tokenized securities are an on-chain version of traditional securities, but traded via blockchain rails.

Citadel wants everyone to play by the rules

Intriguingly, the BA’s request for the SEC to consider how “modern blockchain infrastructure design” works is what Citadel and SIFMA (broader TradFi group) are against. For the TradFi players, the SEC must ensure a level playing field through a “neutral technology” framework.

For them, the issue is not whether a DeFi venue is custodial (controlled by the developer) or not. What’s crucial, they added, is that every platform handling tokenized securities must be under oversight just like traditional intermediaries.

According to critics of the proposed innovation exemption, investor protections in the DeFi world, which is full of scams and rug pulls, can only be ensured by regulations.

Last week, another crypto lobby, the DeFi Education Fund (DEF), castigated SIFMA and Citadel’s call for regulation of AMMs (automated market makers), which are deemed decentralized platforms by experts.

It remains to be seen which route the SEC will take and whether the disgruntled side will sue the agency for its decision on the innovation exemption.

Even so, if the agency’s rulemaking or guidelines related to DeFi exemptions aren’t codified via the CLARITY Act, then they could still be disputed in court. For instance, Roman Storm, the developer behind Tornado Cash with no control over the crypto mixer, is still facing a retrial.

Final Summary

Blockchain Association has joined DeFi Education Fund to fend off Citadel and Wall Street’s push for regulations of decentralized protocols.
The DeFi lobby groups pleaded with the SEC to consider the neutral nature of decentralized protocols before attempting to regulate them.

Пов'язані питання

QWhat is the main argument of the Blockchain Association (BA) against Citadel's proposed DeFi regulations?

AThe Blockchain Association argues that Citadel's proposed regulation is a 'wrong approach,' stating that securities laws regulate intermediaries and should not automatically turn neutral infrastructure into an exchange, broker, or dealer simply because it is part of a tokenized market.

QAccording to the article, what do Citadel and SIFMA believe is crucial for platforms handling tokenized securities?

ACitadel and SIFMA believe that every platform handling tokenized securities must be under regulatory oversight, just like traditional intermediaries, to ensure a level playing field through a 'neutral technology' framework.

QWhat specific request did the Blockchain Association make to the SEC regarding DeFi regulation?

AThe Blockchain Association asked the SEC to consider how the underlying technology of 'modern blockchain infrastructure design' works before regulating any DeFi protocol, rather than granting a blanket exemption or applying rules without understanding the tech.

QWhich other crypto lobby group has also opposed Citadel and SIFMA's call for DeFi regulation?

AThe DeFi Education Fund (DEF) has also opposed Citadel and SIFMA's call for regulation, specifically criticizing their push to regulate automated market makers (AMMs).

QWhat potential legal outcome is mentioned if the SEC's rulemaking on DeFi exemptions isn't codified via the CLARITY Act?

AIf the SEC's rulemaking or guidelines related to DeFi exemptions aren't codified via the CLARITY Act, they could still be disputed in court, as seen in the case of Roman Storm, the developer behind Tornado Cash, who is facing a retrial.

Пов'язані матеріали

Bitmine Loads Up On 101,627 Ether In Record Post-December Buy

Bitmine Immersion Technologies significantly expanded its Ethereum holdings by acquiring 101,627 ETH in mid-April, marking its largest single-week purchase since December 2025. The company now holds nearly 5 million ETH, valued at approximately $11.5 billion, representing about 4.12% of all circulating Ether. Its goal is to reach 5% ownership. Of its total ETH, 3.33 million is actively staked, generating over $200 million in annualized revenue. Chairman Tom Lee stated that the company has increased its buying pace, believing Ethereum is nearing the end of a "mini-crypto winter." Bitmine also recently uplisted to the NYSE, improving its visibility among institutional investors.

bitcoinist2 хв тому

Bitmine Loads Up On 101,627 Ether In Record Post-December Buy

bitcoinist2 хв тому

Arbitrum Pretends to Be the Hacker, 'Steals' Back the Money Lost by KelpDAO

Title: Arbitrum Poses as Hacker to Recover Stolen Funds from KelpDAO Last week, KelpDAO suffered a hack resulting in nearly $300 million in losses, marking the largest DeFi security incident this year. Approximately 30,765 ETH (worth over $70 million) remained on an Arbitrum address controlled by the attacker. In an unprecedented move, Arbitrum’s Security Council utilized its emergency authority to upgrade the Inbox bridge contract, adding a function that allowed them to impersonate the hacker’s address and initiate a transfer without access to its private key. The council’s action, approved by 9 of its 12 members, moved the stolen ETH to a frozen address in a single transaction before reverting the contract to its original state. The operation was coordinated with law enforcement, which attributed the attack to North Korea’s Lazarus Group. Community reactions are divided: some praise the recovery of funds, while others question the centralization of power, as the council can upgrade core contracts without governance votes. However, such emergency mechanisms are common among major L2s. Despite the partial recovery, over $292 million was stolen in total, with more than $100 million in bad debt on Aave and remaining funds scattered across other chains. The incident highlights escalating security challenges in DeFi, with state-sponsored hackers employing advanced tactics and L2s responding with elevated countermeasures.

marsbit5 хв тому

Arbitrum Pretends to Be the Hacker, 'Steals' Back the Money Lost by KelpDAO

marsbit5 хв тому

iQiyi Is Too Impatient

The article "iQiyi Is Too Impatient" discusses the controversy surrounding the Chinese streaming platform IQiyi's recent announcement of an "AI Actor Library" during its 2026 World Conference. IQiyi claimed over 100 actors, including well-known names like Zhang Ruoyun and Yu Hewei, had joined the initiative. CEO Gong Yu suggested AI could enable actors to "star in 14 dramas a year instead of 4" and that "live-action filming might become a world cultural heritage." The announcement quickly sparked backlash. Multiple actors named in the list issued urgent statements denying they had signed any AI-related authorization agreements. This forced IQiyi to clarify that inclusion in the library only indicated a willingness to *consider* AI projects, with separate negotiations required for any specific role. The incident, which trended on social media with hashtags like "IQiyi is crazy," is presented as a sign of the company's growing desperation. Facing intense competition from short-video platforms like Douyin and Kuaishou, as well as Bilibili and Xiaohongshu, IQiyi's financial performance has weakened, with revenues declining for two consecutive years. The author argues that IQiyi is "too impatient" to tell a compelling AI story to reassure the market, especially as it pursues a listing on the Hong Kong stock exchange. The piece concludes by outlining three key "AI questions" IQiyi must answer: defining its role as a tool provider versus a content creator, balancing the "coldness" of AI with the human element audiences desire, and properly managing the interests of platforms, actors, and viewers. The core dilemma is that while AI can reduce costs and increase efficiency, it risks creating homogenized, formulaic content and devaluing human performers.

marsbit59 хв тому

Jensen Huang Publicly Challenges Google and Amazon, Is the Chip Business Entirely Sustained by Anthropic?

In a candid interview, Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang challenged competitors like Google and Amazon, admitted past strategic errors, and criticized U.S. export controls on AI chips. He framed Nvidia’s role as turning “electricity in, tokens out,” emphasizing the complexity and value of AI inference. Huang dismissed rival custom chips like Google’s TPU and Amazon’s Trainium as inflexible and niche, claiming their growth relies heavily on clients like Anthropic. He also acknowledged missing early investment opportunities in OpenAI and Anthropic. On China, Huang warned that export restrictions risk pushing the country toward self-sufficiency and could cost U.S. leadership in AI. Finally, he explained Nvidia’s acquisition of Groq as a move to serve premium, low-latency token markets. Throughout, Huang emphasized ecosystem trust and Nvidia’s central role in global AI infrastructure.

marsbit1 год тому

Jensen Huang Publicly Challenges Google and Amazon, Is the Chip Business Entirely Sustained by Anthropic?

marsbit1 год тому

ARK's SpaceX IPO Investment Guide: $1.75 Trillion Valuation, 95x Price-to-Sales Ratio, Where Is the Money Going?

ARK Invest, a major investor in SpaceX, provides an analysis following SpaceX's confidential IPO filing on April 1, 2026, targeting a $1.75 trillion valuation and up to $75 billion in funding for a Nasdaq listing around June 2026. This would be the largest IPO in history. The valuation implies a price-to-sales ratio of ~95x based on ~$18.5B in projected 2025 revenue. ARK argues this reflects future potential, not current reality. Key drivers include Starlink, with over 10M users and $20B+ in 2026 revenue, launch services which have reduced costs by ~95% since 2008, and the strategic merger with xAI in February 2026, enabling vertically integrated AI and orbital computing. ARK’s investment thesis is based on SpaceX's proven execution of ambitious goals, like reusable rockets and global satellite internet. The firm notes that significant value creation often occurs pre-IPO, and its Venture Fund offers exposure to SpaceX’s earlier private stages. Post-IPO, the fund will manage the position per standard lock-up and rebalancing processes, maintaining flexibility to reinvest in other private innovations. The analysis is based on public estimates and ARK research; the S-1 filing is not yet public. This is not investment advice.

marsbit1 год тому

ARK's SpaceX IPO Investment Guide: $1.75 Trillion Valuation, 95x Price-to-Sales Ratio, Where Is the Money Going?

marsbit1 год тому

Торгівля

Спот

Ф'ючерси