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
Alan Konevsky, tZERO Group, Inc.

Re: SEC Crypto 2.0: Formation of New Crypto Task Force 		Crypto Lending, Custody, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Trading
  • The document emphasizes the need for a clear regulatory framework for digital assets to ensure the United States remains a global leader in the digital evolution, particularly in financial markets.
  • It advocates for updates to the Special Purpose Broker-Dealer (SPBD) Statement to allow SPBDs to custody non-security crypto assets and engage in non-custodial activities.
  • The document calls for a clear path for issuers to cure historical securities law violations for digital assets that were not issued in compliance with securities laws.
Digital Asset Holdings, LLC

Letter to the Crypto Task Force 		Custody, Regulatory Sandbox, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The submission focuses on the tokenization of traditional securities, emphasizing the need for regulatory clarity to accelerate innovation while ensuring fair, orderly, and efficient capital markets.
  • The document highlights the importance of privacy, control, security, and transaction finality in blockchain-based books and records, advocating for the use of blockchain as permissible electronic books and records.
  • Recommendations include providing no-action relief for market participants conducting core market transactions with tokenized traditional securities, enabling real-time settlement and the use of tokenized securities as collateral.
Zack Dane, Revolve

Public Security Opinion 		RFI Responses, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The document discusses the need for tailored disclosure requirements for Real World Asset (RWA) backed digital assets versus speculative or enterprise-driven assets.
  • It emphasizes the importance of making Regulation A/A+ exemptions more widely available and less difficult to navigate.
  • The document suggests using single asset entities (LLC or similar) for titled RWAs to create a verifiable real-world entity to help with customer protection.
J.W. Verret, GMU Scalia Law School

Letter to the Crypto Task Force 		Regulatory Sandbox, RFI Responses, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The document proposes a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the SEC and CFTC to facilitate developer choice among various exemptions and pathways, promoting financial privacy, immutability, and decentralization.
  • It suggests the issuance of nine exemptive releases or rule proposals within one year, targeting specific patterns of public blockchain development and disbursal, rather than classifying tokens themselves.
  • The document advocates for the use of regulatory agreements or "contracts" as a flexible sandbox mechanism, providing tailored compliance obligations and safe-harbor conditions for individual innovators.
William R Stanek, WilliamRStanek.com

A Prudent Digital Assets Framework: Balancing Innovation, Consumer Protection, and Monetary Sovereignty 		Custody, Regulatory Sandbox, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The document proposes a structured policy environment for digital assets in the United States to foster long-term economic growth, financial stability, and global competitiveness.
  • It emphasizes the need for regulatory clarity and standardized disclosures to ensure trust and market integrity.
  • The framework includes foundational principles such as transparency, monetary sovereignty, consumer and investor protections, responsible innovation, and global coordination.
Benjamin Allen

Memo Board: A Web3 Framework for Trust, Altruism, and Secure Data Exchange 		Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • Memo Board introduces a blockchain-based incentive system that tokenizes altruistic actions through verifiable and tamper-proof Deed Tokens.
  • The system implements Non-Fungible Data Tokens (NFDTs) to protect the integrity, ownership, and traceability of critical data.
  • Memo Board is governed by a Decentralized Autonomous Organization (DAO), ensuring democratic oversight through stakeholder voting.
Jason Berkun, George Washington University Law School

RE: A Workable “Efforts of Others” Framework for Digital Assets Sold Pursuant to Investment Contracts 		RFI Responses, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The SEC should use its interpretive authority to protect investors, facilitate capital formation, and maintain fair, orderly, and efficient markets in digital asset transactions.
  • A flexible three-step test is proposed to delineate the "efforts of others" prong of Howey, providing a framework for blockchain projects to decentralize management and avoid being considered sold pursuant to an investment contract.
  • The SEC must draw an arbitrary line to determine whether digital assets are sold pursuant to an investment contract based on control of a blockchain, control of a protocol, and ownership rights in an enterprise or object.
William C. Hughes, Consensys Software Inc.

Re: Amendments Regarding the Definition of “Exchange” (Release No. 34-97309, File No. S7-02-22), RIN 3235–AM45 		RFI Responses, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Trading
  • The amendments exceed the SEC's statutory authority by expanding the definition of "exchange" beyond what the statutory definition permits.
  • The amendments are arbitrary and capricious under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) because they improperly expand the applicability of broker-dealer regulations rather than exchange regulations.
  • The required cost-benefit analysis is facially insufficient to withstand scrutiny, as the amendments fail to show that their benefits outweigh their costs.
Lennart Arte, Blockchain Research Lab

Uncertain Regulations, Definite Impacts: The Impact of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission’s Regulatory Interventions on Crypto Assets 		Regulatory Sandbox, Safe Harbor, Security Status
  • The SEC's classification of most cryptocurrencies, except Bitcoin, as securities has led to significant adverse market reactions, with returns dropping 12% over one week post-announcement.
  • The lack of clear regulatory guidelines from the SEC has created an unpredictable and volatile environment for market participants, increasing systemic risk and regulatory arbitrage.
  • The SEC's actions, influenced by traditional financial industry interests, may stifle innovation and push entrepreneurs to more crypto-friendly jurisdictions.