Written by: Yangz, Techub News
In the crypto industry, where policies and market conditions are closely linked, the regulatory trends of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) always resonate throughout the sector. Last night, SEC Chairman Paul Atkins delivered a latest speech on the "Project Crypto" initiative, further proposing specific implementation details and a token classification framework based on the previously indicated friendly regulatory direction. Although this statement did not effectively boost the current weak market, it indeed formed a stark contrast to the ambiguous regulation during Gary Gensler's tenure.
This article will analyze the new ideas that the current SEC hopes to convey in the field of digital asset regulation by outlining the core content of this speech.
Ending the Confusion: From "Identity Crisis" to "Substantive Analysis"
In recent years, the digital asset market has been mired in a core dilemma: "Are cryptocurrencies securities?" Unlike former Chairman Gary Gensler's assertion that "most cryptocurrencies are securities except for Bitcoin," Paul Atkins made the fundamental assertion that "most cryptocurrencies traded today are not securities." He also pointed directly to the root of this issue, stating that "crypto assets" are a technical term rather than a legal definition. Paul Atkins indicated that "crypto assets" describe the methods of value recording and transfer but do not explicitly attach legal rights or economic substance to specific instruments. Equating technical descriptions with legal classifications has been key to the previous regulatory confusion and market uncertainty.
The SEC's new approach aims to clear this fog. Its primary principle is to uphold "economic substance over formal labels." Regardless of whether an asset is called a "token" or "NFT," as long as it essentially represents a claim to a company's profits and its expected returns primarily depend on the efforts of others' management, it should be subject to securities law. Conversely, a token merely because it has participated in financing activities does not mean it will forever bear the "security" label. This position returns to the core idea of "emphasizing substance over form" established by the U.S. Supreme Court in the "Howey Test" and is a clear correction to the ambiguous regulation of the Gensler era.
Building a Clear Framework: Regulatory Practice of Token Classification
One of the most notable initiatives in this speech is the proposal to establish a clear token classification system. According to Paul Atkins, this classification is not created out of thin air but is based on extensive market research, roundtable discussions, and public feedback, aiming to reflect the diversity of the digital asset ecosystem:
"Digital Commodities"/"Network Tokens": The value of these tokens derives from the "functionality" and "decentralized" operation of the crypto system, rather than relying on the core management efforts of others. In Paul Atkins' view, they do not fall under securities.
"Digital Collectibles": Designed for collection, use, or representation of specific rights (such as artwork, music, game items, etc.). The primary motivation for buyers is not investment profit, thus they are not considered securities.
"Digital Tools": These have specific practical functions, such as membership credentials, tickets, identity identifiers, etc. Their economic substance is far removed from investment contracts, so they are also not securities.
"Tokenized Securities": This is a category that clearly falls under securities, referring to digital assets that represent ownership of traditional securities (such as stocks, bonds) and exist in the form of blockchain technology.
The significance of this classification lies in its acknowledgment of the complexity of the digital asset world, rejecting the forced imposition of a single framework on tokens of various forms, and providing differentiated regulatory expectations for different types of innovations.
Dynamic Howey Test: The "Lifecycle" Theory of Investment Contracts
Paul Atkins' interpretation of the "Howey Test" is particularly crucial. By cleverly referencing the historical changes of the "Howey case" itself, Paul Atkins introduced the dynamic view that "investment contracts have a lifecycle." In the "Howey case," the citrus groves once used for investment contracts have now transformed into golf courses and residential areas, and no one would consider this land itself still a security. Similarly, a token may initially constitute part of an investment contract due to the explicit commitments from the development team regarding value creation. However, as the network matures, the code is deployed, and control is decentralized, the core management role of the issuer may weaken or even disappear. At this point, buyers no longer reasonably rely on the issuer's efforts to obtain profits, and the investment contract has essentially been fulfilled or terminated.
This means that the "security" attribute of a token is not immutable. Once the commitments supporting the investment contract have been fulfilled, failed, or terminated for other reasons, subsequent token transactions should not automatically be classified as securities transactions. This "lifecycle" theory provides crucial legal grounds for projects transitioning from startup financing to mature networks and formally corrects the rigid notion from the Gensler era that "once a security, always a security."
Regulatory Collaboration and Legislative Safeguards: Building a Complete Ecosystem
Paul Atkins' speech on "Project Crypto" did not attempt to infinitely expand the SEC's regulatory authority but rather demonstrated a clear awareness of boundaries and a willingness for institutional collaboration.
Supporting congressional legislation is a core manifestation of this idea. Paul Atkins explicitly supports Congress in establishing a comprehensive framework for the crypto market through legislation. He believes that the SEC's regulatory guidance should complement Congress's legislative work, and the most solid protection comes from clear legal provisions established by Congress, which can effectively prevent the possibility of a "future SEC shift."
Additionally, Paul Atkins advocates for clear regulatory division of labor and exploring hybrid regulation to "support super applications in the financial sector." Paul Atkins stated that he has asked SEC staff to prepare relevant proposals to allow tokens related to investment contracts to be traded on platforms regulated by the CFTC or under state regulatory systems. While maintaining regulation, it leaves reasonable space for innovative structures.
Conclusion
From the official announcement of "Project Crypto" in early August this year to the gradually clearer token classification and dynamic Howey test, the regulatory thinking exhibited by SEC Chairman in two speeches is a repeated denial of the confrontation and uncertainty of the Gensler era, as well as an embrace of clear and flexible regulation. As Paul Atkins emphasized in his August speech, "Project Crypto" is not just a regulatory scheme but will serve as "the North Star in assisting President Trump in making the U.S. the 'global crypto capital,'" continuously guiding the future regulatory direction of the U.S. in the digital asset field.
However, improvements in regulation or policy are always just a necessary condition for innovation, not a sufficient one. As industry observers generally point out, "this bull market lacks true innovation," builders should be keenly aware that fair and rational regulation can clear obstacles for innovation but cannot replace innovation itself; it can delineate the track but cannot replace the running on the field. As Atkins said in this speech, "The fate of the market or any specific project is always determined by the market."
免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。
