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
Josh Lawler, Zubler Lawler

There Must Be Some Kinda Way Out of Here Part II -- Security Status 		Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The Commission should identify categories of crypto digital assets and transactions that do not fall within its authority, considering the economic reality of what is being offered or sold.
  • Stablecoins, wrapped tokens, and NFTs should be analyzed based on their use case and the context of their sale to determine if they require the protections applicable to capital raising vehicles.
  • Disclosure requirements for digital assets should be driven by the token use case, including information about total and circulating supply, token utility demand statistics, project roadmap, team, and competitive landscape.
     
Anthony Guerino

Proposal to the Crypto Task Force: Positioning for the Tokenized Economy 		Crypto Lending, Custody, Public Offerings, Regulatory Sandbox, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • Advocate for regulatory clarity on XRP, tokenized assets, and stablecoin-AMM integrations.
  • Encourage liquidity infrastructure development to support institutional tokenization initiatives.
  • Monitor BIS and IMF-backed digital currency pilots for integration opportunities.
Jacob Clayton, SAGINT

Letter to the Crypto Task Force 		Custody, Regulatory Sandbox, Safe Harbor, Tokenization, Trading
  • Clear Asset Classification: Define when tokenized RWAs constitute securities under the Howey Test.
  • Streamlined Registration: Recommend a blockchain-specific registration pathway, potentially a safe harbor.
  • Custody and Market Rules: Modernize custody rules to include tokenized assets and adapt broker-dealer regulations.
     
Gabriel Shapiro, MetaLeX

Token Safe Harbor Proposal 3.0 		Safe Harbor, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The proposal seeks to exempt qualifying transactions in decentralized autonomous tokens or utility tokens from the registration requirements and certain other formalities of the securities laws.
  • It clarifies that risk-capital-raising sales of tokens to investors remain investment contracts and must be either registered or exempt from registration.
  • The proposal revises provisions relating to decentralization tests to apply to smart contract systems and layers rather than just pure blockchain networks.
     
Andreesen Horowitz, a16z

Re: Recommendations Regarding a Safe Harbor for Certain Airdrops and Incentive-Based Rewards of Network Tokens 		Safe Harbor, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The proposal recommends clear criteria for excluding certain airdrops and incentive-based rewards of network tokens from federal securities laws.
  • It argues that Section 5 registration is unwarranted for airdrops and incentive-based rewards that do not pose the risks federal securities laws are intended to address.
  • The proposal emphasizes the need for robust transfer restrictions to prevent insiders from exploiting asymmetric information and capitalizing on token volatility.
Andreesen Horowitz, a16z

Re: Comments on the SEC Crypto Task Force’s Questions Concerning the Security Status of Crypto Assets 		Custody, RFI Responses, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Tokenization
  • The document proposes a control-based decentralization framework to limit the application of federal securities laws, suggesting that when control is eliminated, the application of securities laws should be limited.
  • It emphasizes the need for a clear regulatory taxonomy that separates crypto asset classification from transaction analysis, aiming to reduce regulatory uncertainty and enforcement-driven policymaking.
  • The response advocates for the establishment of compliant pathways for network tokens, including the creation of a safe harbor for certain airdrops and incentive-based rewards.
Luc Falempin, Tokeny

SEC Crypto Task Force Input Letter from Tokeny 		Custody, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • Clear regulations should indicate that the same securities laws apply regardless of the technology used, ensuring compliance through permissioned token standards like ERC-3643.
  • Tokens should be recognized as verifiable proofs of ownership when implemented with the right compliance framework, linking ownership to verified identities.
  • Avoid adding extra custody requirements for digital securities, as identity-based permissioned tokens ensure ownership is tied to an investor’s on-chain identity, not individual wallets.
Josh Lawler, Zubler Lawler

There Must Be Some Kinda Way Out of Here[1] Part I -- Security Status[2] 		Custody, Public Offerings, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The definition of "Security" for the '33 Act should be "Something sold in a Capital Raise," with exclusions similar to current ones. The '34 Act should maintain its current definition of "Security" with a clarification that the Howie test investment contract analysis is not applicable to secondary sale transactions.
  • The SEC should regulate activities involving delegated staking, where a third-party generates a return based on the provision of compute resources or liquidity, as these activities likely constitute an "investment contract."
  • The Commission should address the status of liquid staking tokens under federal securities laws, recognizing that these tokens are not issued in a Capital Raise and should not be subject to regulation under the '33 Act.
Sarah Brennan, Decentralization Research Center

2025 Safe Harbor Framework Overview 		Regulatory Sandbox, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • The 2025 Safe Harbor Framework provides prospective and retroactive relief for token projects, including Rule 195 for new distributions and Rule 195T for historical distributions.
  • The framework includes an exit test for Network Maturity, ensuring that once achieved, the Initial Development Group lacks control to alter the fundamental characteristics of the Network and Token.
  • The framework imposes commitments on the Initial Development Group, including acceptance of SEC fraud jurisdiction, continuous public disclosure, and caps on sales and lock-ups.
Brian K. McGrail

Letter to the Crypto Task Force 		Crypto ETPs, Crypto Lending, Custody, Public Offerings, Regulatory Sandbox, Safe Harbor, Security Status, Tokenization, Trading
  • Switzerland's DLT Act introduced a legal basis for ledger-based securities and a regulatory license category for DLT trading facilities.
  • Singapore's Payment Services Act (PSA) 2019 brings cryptocurrencies under AML and CFT regulations, ensuring consumer protection while promoting innovation.
  • Japan's Payment Services Act (PSA) and Financial Instruments and Exchange Act (FIEA) recognize Bitcoin as a legal payment method and regulate crypto assets as financial instruments.