SEC crypto asset proposal draws revision push from digital asset firms and Wall Street

SEC crypto asset proposal draws revision push from digital asset firms and Wall Street
SEC crypto rules challenged

With the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission's comment deadline arriving Tuesday, crypto firms, trade groups and Wall Street institutions are pressing for changes to the agency's proposed Regulation Crypto Assets. The proposal would create exemptions for some digital asset offerings and trading activity, including a startup path for raises up to $5 million and a fundraising exemption of up to $75 million for one year.

Highlights

  • Over 100 firms, including Hyperliquid Policy Center and Alternative Investment Management Association, urge the SEC to revise Regulation Crypto Assets exemptions and clarify disclosure rules before the comment period closes.
  • SEC's five-year innovation exemption for onchain trading of tokenized stocks, effective in September, prompts calls from the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association for immediate investor protection adjustments and clearer opt-in processes.
  • The CFTC's expansion into perpetual futures—including products for U.S. oil and compute—spurs Hyperliquid Policy Center to advocate for broader U.S. market access to hedging tools for chips and AI infrastructure.

Industry feedback targets exemptions and disclosure rules

As reported by The Block, more than 100 submissions have been filed as the SEC nears the close of its public comment period on Regulation Crypto Assets, a proposed framework meant to carve out a path for certain digital asset investments without full application of securities registration rules.

The Hyperliquid Policy Center supports adoption of the rule but says the SEC should revise how it treats airdrops. In its letter, the group asks the agency to codify earlier language stating that airdrops that provide nothing in exchange do not involve an investment of money and therefore should not be treated as securities.

HPC also says the proposed safe harbor is too narrow. In a blog post on Monday, the center says the required certification would be difficult for many projects to make.

The Alternative Investment Management Association is also seeking changes. Its letter calls for clearer explanations of investors' legal rights and risks, including issues that could affect managers, and says issuers should distinguish utility or economic exposure from ownership, redemption, cash-flow and contractual rights.

Innovation exemption and CFTC agenda widen policy debate

The SEC's separate innovation exemption, which takes effect in September, is also drawing attention from established financial institutions. The five-year measure opens the door to onchain trading of tokenized stocks by exempting certain tokenized securities venues from being defined as exchanges and some liquidity providers from dealer status when they trade stocks or provide liquidity through automated market makers.

On Monday, the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association says the SEC should address investor protection questions immediately and adjust how participants opt in. The group warns that the five-year duration makes early design decisions especially important because market practices may become entrenched before a permanent regime is adopted.

The broader derivatives debate is also moving at the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. After the CFTC approved the first perpetual futures for Kalshi and Coinbase in August, policy attention has expanded to U.S. oil perpetual futures and, more recently, compute-linked perpetual contracts.

In a Tuesday post, the Hyperliquid Policy Center says the CFTC should allow those compute contracts in the U.S., arguing that investment in chips, artificial intelligence data centers and networking equipment contributes to the economy. The group says developers that rent compute face price risk without widely available hedging tools, while pricing in the market remains fragmented and largely private.

Our earlier article on U.S. AI data-center expansion highlighted how rising financing costs, construction delays, and power constraints are undermining the credibility of many planned projects. We noted that only a minority of proposed builds were viewed as realistic, while cost overruns and shifting investor sentiment increased pressure on developers to deliver capacity on time and within budget.

This material may contain third-party opinions, none of the data and information on this webpage constitutes investment advice according to our Disclaimer. While we adhere to strict Editorial Integrity, this post may contain references to products from our partners.