A landmark regulatory shift has been announced in the United States regarding the legal standing of digital assets. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), together with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), unveiled a crucial joint guidance that designates the vast majority of cryptocurrencies as either “commodities” or “digital instruments.” This move introduces a new dimension to the long-running debate over regulatory jurisdiction within the crypto industry.
SEC Shifts Stance with “Token Taxonomy” Framework
Speaking at the Blockchain Summit in Washington, SEC Chair Paul Atkins clearly outlined the agency’s new direction. He highlighted that the revised “token taxonomy” for the crypto industry was developed collaboratively, emphasizing the end of viewing all digital assets as securities. According to the new guidelines, assets such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, XRP, ADA, and LINK—as well as NFTs and digital collectibles—will no longer be treated as securities under US law.
Expanded Exemptions and Regulatory Realignment
The revised rules remove payment tokens, collectibles, and utility tokens from the SEC’s direct oversight. Traditional securities represented on blockchains—such as tokenized stocks and bonds—will remain under SEC scrutiny. Atkins’ previously stated credo of “innovation first, regulation second” has now found official footing in the form of these new policies.
Importantly, these developments bypassed the stalled Congressional process on the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, which has yet to reach a vote. The interim guidance anticipates the regulatory order that would be implemented should the bill pass, providing industry participants with a temporary degree of legal certainty in a fast-changing environment.
Concerns Over Conflict of Interest in Trump Family-Linked Project
With the new framework’s rollout, questions of conflict of interest surfaced in the public sphere, focusing particularly on World Liberty Financial—a decentralized finance project controlled by the Trump family. Previously, the project had to comply with strict disclosure and lock-up requirements for its tokenized assets under the former regulatory regime. Those obligations have now effectively been lifted.
Todd Baker, a senior researcher at Columbia Law School, argued that the updated approach insulates for-profit projects—whose societal benefits remain debatable—from comprehensive federal oversight, raising concerns about regulatory gaps.
Only a few months ago, platforms like Gemini were embroiled in major lawsuits over governance and compliance violations. Under the new provisions, similar legal challenges appear unlikely for projects like World Liberty Financial, so long as they operate in non-securitized digital assets.
This regulatory pivot is widely seen as an ambitious step to reinforce the United States’ leadership role in the global crypto market. Cody Carbone from the Digital Chamber asserted that such measures are necessary to bolster American competitiveness, while Summer Mersinger of the Blockchain Association noted that, although the collaboration is a near-term positive, political friction could persist in the longer run.
In the end, the industry continues to navigate under interim agency guidelines rather than settled law. Unless and until Congress enacts a permanent legislative framework, the prevailing order will depend on the evolving political landscape and shifting regulatory priorities.
