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
Lilya Tessler, Sidley Austin LLP on behalf of Ava Labs, Inc. and Owl Explains

Supplemental Submission Proposing a Nature of the Activity Test to Determine Whether Infrastructure Providers Need to Register as Securities Intermediaries 		Custody, RFI Responses, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The submission proposes a nature of the activity test to determine whether infrastructure providers need to register as securities intermediaries.
  • The test aligns with existing statutory definitions, the Howey framework, and decades of SEC Staff no-action guidance for analogous activities.
  • The submission argues that infrastructure providers should not be misclassified merely because their activities take place on the blockchain or involve crypto assets.
DeFi Education Fund and Uniswap Foundation

Re: Response to the Crypto Task Force’s Request for Comment: Regarding Decentralized Autonomous Organizations 		RFI Responses, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • DEF and UF support Commissioner Peirce's proposal for a non-exclusive safe harbor (Rule 195) that would provide a time-limited exemption from registration requirements under the Securities Act of 1933 for offers and sales of cryptocurrency assets during the development of a blockchain project.
  • DEF and UF argue that a DAO with dispersed control over governance should not have its network tokens or transactions considered as securities under the Howey test.
  • DEF and UF emphasize that blockchain records eliminate informational asymmetries, making traditional disclosure requirements unnecessary for sufficiently decentralized networks.
Etherfuse, Brogan Law PLLC

Toward a Framework for Tokenized Sovereign Bonds 		Custody, Public Offerings, Regulatory Sandbox, RFI Responses, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • Etherfuse Stablebonds are tokenized bonds backed by sovereign bonds maintained in audited, transparent collateral reserves and are legally offered in Mexico through a resolution from the Mexican financial authority (CNBV).
  • Etherfuse prohibits U.S. Persons from accessing Stablebonds, implementing geofencing and KYC checks to ensure compliance with this limitation.
  • The document proposes that the SEC provide exemptive relief under Section 28 of the Securities Act of 1933 to allow unregistered offering of certain sovereign bonds classified as "Qualifying Foreign Government Securities" (QFGSs).
Margaret Rosenfeld, Everstake, Inc.

Re: Crypto Task Force Meeting 		Custody, RFI Responses, Security Status, Trading
  • Staking is central to the functioning of proof-of-stake blockchain networks and should not be mischaracterized as an investment or financial contract.
  • Misclassification or overregulation of staking could weaken blockchain infrastructure, reduce validator participation, and drive activity offshore.
  • Non-custodial staking services help decentralize stake distribution and mitigate systemic risks by empowering individual token holders to retain control over their assets.
Interop Labs Inc.

Re: Responses to the SEC Crypto Task Force’s Questions 		Custody, RFI Responses, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Tokenization
  • Interop Labs urges the SEC to distinguish between centralized and decentralized interoperability networks and to issue guidance or a safe harbor exempting decentralized, non-custodial systems from intermediary registration requirements.
  • The document proposes principles for evaluating decentralization, including open-source protocols, public accessibility, permissionless operation, immutability, and distributed governance.
  • Interop Labs emphasizes that decentralized interoperability networks reduce systemic vulnerabilities and uphold investor protections through protocol-level safeguards.
Anderson P.C.

Support for the SEC Crypto Task Force's Vision and Regulatory Modernization for Digital Assets 		Custody, RFI Responses, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Tokenization
  • Anderson P.C. supports an activity-based regulatory framework over asset-based classification, advocating for the bifurcation of "security" definitions under the '33 and '34 Acts to provide clearer compliance pathways for digital assets.
  • The letter urges the SEC to issue interpretive guidance affirming decentralized oracle networks (DONs) as legitimate and reliable price benchmarks under fair value accounting standards and SEC rules.
  • Anderson P.C. recommends a tailored disclosure framework for network tokens, emphasizing transparency about tokenomics, governance, security audits, contributor incentives, and decentralization milestones.
Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association (SIFMA)

Request for Comment on There Must Be Some Way Out of Here 		Custody, RFI Responses, Security Status, Tokenization
  • SIFMA recommends that the SEC adopt clear, consistent, and consensus-driven taxonomies and classification approaches for digital assets to provide greater clarity to market participants.
  • SIFMA urges the SEC to apply traditional regulatory principles around custody to digital assets, including the separation of financial activities, segregation of client assets, and ensuring proper control of assets.
  • SIFMA supports the SEC's efforts to provide guidance scoping-out non-securities digital assets and digital asset activities, emphasizing a technology-neutral approach.
     
Mysten Labs, Inc.

Mysten Labs’ Response to “There Must Be Some Way Out of Here”: The Paramount Importance of Utility to the Security Status of Digital Assets 		RFI Responses, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The utility and real-world use case of a digital asset should be a primary determining factor in whether the asset is deemed a "security" under U.S. federal securities laws.
  • Digital assets with utility and real-world use cases are more appropriately regulated by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) rather than the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC).
  • The regulatory approach should avoid excessively complicated, multi-part legal tests and instead focus on practical, usable, and reasonable legal standards.
The Digital Chamber

Re: CTF Written Input - The Digital Chamber 		Crypto ETPs, Custody, RFI Responses, Security Status, Trading
  • The Commission should adopt clear, evidence-based standards for reviewing crypto-asset based ETPs, focusing on the size and liquidity of the underlying spot market rather than the existence of a surveillance-sharing agreement (SSA) or a regulated market.
  • Market capitalization and the number of active spot markets should be prioritized as the most significant factors in evaluating crypto assets for ETP listing.
  • The historical track records of ETFs registered under the Investment Company Act that obtain exposure to the same assets as a proposed ETP should be highly instructive to the Commission.
     
Unit 410, LLC

Request for Regulatory Guidance – Qualified Self-Custody 		Custody, RFI Responses, Safe Harbor, Security Status
  • Proposes a Qualified Self-Custodian (QSC) framework for Registered Investment Advisers (RIAs) to self-custody digital assets when traditional Qualified Custodian (QC) options are unavailable.
  • Emphasizes the need for RIAs to document their fiduciary judgment and implement safeguarding principles to protect investors while self-custodying digital assets.
  • Requests interim regulatory guidance and potential rulemaking to address the regulatory gap and facilitate secure, legal, and practical self-custody solutions for digital assets.