In the past more than a decade, the American cryptocurrency industry has been in a peculiar state.

The market size has developed to the trillion-dollar level, but the regulatory system has yet to form a complete structure. The two core questions have remained unanswered:

• What exactly are crypto assets?
• If problems arise, who will regulate?

These two questions seem simple, yet they constitute the root of the long-standing chaos in U.S. cryptocurrency regulation.

However, over the past few months, the American regulatory system has started to send a series of new signals—a response to these two questions is being reevaluated.

Regulatory Fog

In the U.S. financial regulatory system, cryptocurrency assets have always existed in the jurisdictional boundary between two major agencies. One is the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the other is the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The SEC is responsible for the securities market, while the CFTC regulates commodities and derivatives trading.

The problem is that crypto assets have two characteristics simultaneously. Some tokens have financing properties and appear to be securities. Others resemble digital commodities or internet resources.

Therefore, for many years, the U.S. cryptocurrency industry has faced a core uncertainty: the same asset may be interpreted by two sets of regulatory logic simultaneously. This situation is referred to by many industry insiders as the “regulatory fog.”

Businesses often find it difficult to determine which set of rules applies to a specific product. In some cases, companies even need to face two regulatory agencies at the same time.

This regulatory conflict does not only lead to legal disputes. It directly impacts the commercial decisions of enterprises. SEC Chair Paul Atkins acknowledged in a public speech that regulatory conflicts, duplicate registration requirements, and different rule systems have, to some extent, stifled innovation and driven some market participants to shift to other jurisdictions.

In other words, the internal divisions within the U.S. regulatory system are weakening its attractiveness to the cryptocurrency industry.

How to Classify Crypto Assets?

For a long time, the U.S. federal securities law has not recognized the concept of “crypto assets.”

Regulatory agencies usually rely on the Howey Test to determine whether an asset falls under the category of securities, used to judge whether a transaction constitutes an investment contract. Simply put, if an investor puts in funds and primarily relies on the efforts of others to generate profits, then this arrangement may be considered a security.

For decades, this standard has been at the core of U.S. securities regulation. But when this logic is applied to crypto assets, things become complicated.

Some tokens clearly have investment attributes. Others resemble internet usage credentials. Yet others are merely digital collectibles.

In the same market, the nature of assets can be completely different.

Faced with this complexity, the SEC proposed a new regulatory approach in November 2025. SEC Chair Paul Atkins stated that the SEC is establishing a classification framework for tokens based on the Howey Test. This framework categorizes digital assets into four types:

• Digital commodities or network tokens
• Digital collectibles
• Digital tools
• Tokenized securities

This classification framework also marks the first systematic recognition by U.S. regulators that not all crypto assets are securities.

Who Will Regulate?

But even as asset types begin to become clearer, another question remains.

If some tokens are deemed digital commodities, then who holds regulatory authority?

In the U.S. financial system, the primary regulatory authority over the commodity market is the CFTC. This means that once certain digital assets are considered commodities, the regulatory power does not entirely belong to the SEC.

This has been the institutional contradiction that has existed between the SEC and CFTC for many years.

The Fog Begins to Lift

Recently, signs have emerged indicating a softening of this long-standing regulatory divergence.

The SEC and CFTC announced a memorandum of understanding (MOU), promising to strengthen coordination in multiple areas, including:

• Regulation of crypto assets
• New digital asset products
• Investor protection
• Federal-level policy framework

Although the MOU itself does not carry legal binding force, it sends a clear signal: U.S. regulatory agencies are beginning to attempt to resolve the long-standing jurisdictional conflicts.

The two agencies also proposed a key goal—establishing an “adaptive regulatory framework.”

This means that the U.S. may no longer simply impose traditional financial rules directly onto digital assets, but will try to design a more suitable system for this emerging market.

Behind this change lies a more macro background.

In recent years, major global financial centers have been accelerating the construction of regulatory frameworks for digital assets. Some regions have already launched unified regulatory frameworks. Others are attracting crypto companies by establishing clear rules.

In contrast, the U.S., despite having the largest crypto market, has long had a fragmented regulatory system. An increasing number of businesses are choosing to operate in jurisdictions with clearer regulations. This trend is clearly not ideal for the U.S.

Meanwhile, the structure of the crypto market is also changing.

In the early crypto industry, the focus was mainly on native crypto assets, while now the two fastest-growing areas are: stablecoins and Real-World Assets (RWAs). U.S. dollar stablecoins typically use assets such as U.S. Treasury bonds as reserves; RWAs directly tokenize traditional financial assets.

This means that crypto finance is gradually integrating into the traditional financial system. When the two begin to merge, the regulatory structure must also adjust accordingly.

New Regulatory Structure

When viewed collectively, it appears that the U.S. regulatory system is undergoing a structural reorganization.

• Step one is to clarify the basic classifications of digital assets.
• Step two is to coordinate the boundaries of authority between different regulatory agencies.
• Step three may be to establish unified federal-level market rules for digital assets.

If this process is ultimately completed, the U.S. will have a complete regulatory system for digital assets.

From a broader perspective, this regulatory reconstruction is not only related to the crypto industry itself. It also pertains to the rule-making power of the future financial system.

As stablecoins, tokenized assets, and on-chain finance develop, digital assets are gradually becoming a new financial infrastructure.

Regulatory agencies worldwide are trying to answer the same question: who will make the rules in the era of digital finance?

The current regulatory adjustments in the U.S. are part of this competition.

As the rules gradually become clearer, the cryptocurrency industry may also transition from a long-standing state of regulatory uncertainty into a new phase.

*The content of this article is for reference only and does not constitute any investment advice. The market has risks, and investment requires caution.

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。