Crypto Task Force Written Input

Please find written input submissions to the Crypto Task Force below. The written input is posted without modification. We hope sharing the submissions will help encourage productive dialogue and continued engagement. Please note that the “Key Points” and “Topics” are AI generated. AI can make mistakes, and the Key Points and Topics are not a replacement for you reading the submissions. The Crypto Task Force has not reviewed these AI-generated summaries for accuracy or completeness. If you believe a Key Point or Topic is inaccurate, please email the Crypto Task Force at crypto@sec.gov. The written input provided to the SEC and posted on this page does not necessarily reflect the views of the Crypto Task Force or others in the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission.

Date Written Input Topic(s) Key Points
Blockchain Association

Re: Written Input Regarding Trading-Related Topics 		Custody, RFI Responses, Security Status, Trading
  • The Blockchain Association (BA) advocates for an incremental, flexible approach to regulating crypto asset trading, emphasizing the need for the SEC to adapt existing rules to accommodate technological and market innovations.
  • BA suggests that the SEC should not impose requirements for investors to transact through intermediaries, and should leverage blockchain technology to enhance market efficiency and transparency.
  • BA recommends specific updates to SEC rules, including relief from certain timing requirements for trade confirmations, modifications to net capital rules for broker-dealers, and allowing blockchain-based books and records for regulatory purposes.
PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Letter to the Crypto Task Force 		Custody, Public Offerings, RFI Responses, Security Status
  • PwC emphasizes the need for a framework that identifies how the characteristics of different crypto assets (e.g., stablecoins, non-fungible tokens) determine their security status.
  • PwC suggests leveraging existing public offering rules with necessary modifications for crypto assets that meet the definition of a security.
  • PwC recommends expanding custody-related regulations to provide adequate investor protection for crypto assets, even if they do not meet the definition of a security.
Jump Crypto

Re: Application of the Federal Securities Laws to the Digital Asset Market 		RFI Responses, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Trading
  • The SEC should clarify that most digital assets and digital-asset transactions are not investment contracts under current law.
  • The SEC should use its exemptive authority to make clear that digital assets and transactions without forward-looking contractual obligations are not subject to federal securities laws.
  • If a safe harbor is established, it should be based on the concept of "control" rather than ownership to determine the applicability of securities laws.
Andreessen Horowitz, a16z

Re: Comments on the SEC Crypto Task Force’s Questions Concerning Public Offerings and Safe Harbor from Registration 		RFI Responses
  • Andreessen Horowitz recommends that the SEC establish a taxonomy that clearly identifies when crypto assets may be subject to registration requirements.
  • Andreessen Horowitz recommends that the SEC issue interpretive guidance that distinguishes between seven types of crypto assets.
  • Andreessen Horowitz recommends that the SEC provide exemptive relief, where necessary, to: establish a tailored disclosure framework, clarify reporting requirements under the Exchange Act, provide a pathway for decentralization under Exchange Act requirements, and enable onchain transactions of registered crypto assets.
CCI's Proof of Stake Alliance (POSA)

Re: Law and Policy Considerations Relevant to Staking Services 		Custody, RFI Responses, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Trading
  • Staking and Staking Services do not constitute securities transactions under federal securities laws, as they do not meet the criteria for investment contracts or notes.
  • The provision of Staking Services involves technical activities that secure blockchain networks and are compensated through protocol-defined rewards, not managerial efforts.
  • Regulatory clarity is requested to confirm that staking activities do not constitute the offer and sale of securities, which would help the industry flourish with U.S. participants.
     
Charles V. Callan, Broadridge Financial Solutions

Subject: Comments on the SEC Crypto Task Force’s February 21, 2025 Request for Information (“RFI”) 		Custody, Public Offerings, RFI Responses, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • Broadridge supports the development of tailored disclosure requirements for crypto assets to enhance investor protection and suggests that disclosures should include both traditional financial information and crypto-specific details.
  • The letter emphasizes the importance of frequent updates on material information for crypto assets, with a recommendation for monthly updates or updates as changes occur.
  • Broadridge highlights the need for greater financial literacy education to help investors understand the unique attributes and risks associated with crypto assets.
Lilya Tessler, Sidley Austin LLP, on behalf of The Digital Chamber

Security Status of Certain Crypto-Asset (Token) Transactions 		Custody, RFI Responses, Security Status, Trading
  • The letter discusses the criteria for determining whether certain crypto-asset transactions qualify as securities under existing regulations.
  • It outlines the regulatory implications for entities involved in the issuance, trading, and custody of these crypto-assets.
  • The letter emphasizes the need for clear guidelines to ensure compliance and protect investors
Lee W. McKnight, Syracuse University School of Information Studies

Distinguishing Jokers from Thieves. Rug Pullers vs SEC Crypto Policies 3.0: Nolo Contendere by Regulatory Design 		RFI Responses, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The document emphasizes the need for the SEC to consider AI-powered automation and efficiency gains in market oversight mechanisms to improve investor protection.
  • It suggests that the SEC should support demonstrations of exploratory instances of new tools to encourage entrepreneurs and reassure investors.
  • The document highlights the importance of a clear and consistent regulatory framework to encourage innovation and protect investors in digital asset markets.
Etherealize

Modernizing Transfer Agent Rules for U.S. Leadership in Tokenized Securities 		Custody, RFI Responses, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Tokenization
  • The memo urges the SEC to issue interpretive guidance clarifying that ancillary actors in decentralized blockchain systems are not considered transfer agents.
  • It recommends using the SEC's exemptive authority to create blockchain-based exemptions to existing transfer agent registration mandates.
  • The memo suggests exploring smart contract equivalency to fulfill specific transfer agent functions and establishing standards for blockchain record-keeping systems.
John A. Zecca, Nasdaq, Inc.

Re: What’s in a Name? A Stock by Any Other Name ... Nasdaq Inc.’s Response to “There Must Be Some Way Out of Here” 		Custody, Public Offerings, Regulatory Sandbox, RFI Responses, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The document emphasizes the need for a clear and predictable taxonomy for digital assets to ensure consistent regulation and avoid market distortions.
  • It advocates for a regulatory framework that balances innovation with investor protection, suggesting a light-touch regime for digital assets posing lower risks.
  • The document proposes the establishment of a temporary safe harbor for digital assets not yet clearly classified, allowing them to go to market quickly while pending definitive regulatory classification.