TL;DR
- Regulatory alignment: The SEC’s Crypto Task Force echoed Ripple’s view that speculation alone should not trigger securities laws, reinforcing concerns raised in the CLARITY Act debate.
- New classification: Attorney Teresa Goody Guillen proposed Digital Value Instruments for cryptocurrencies that do not fit existing categories, using a five-factor test requiring at least three qualifying traits.
- Upcoming coordination: The submissions were published ahead of a delayed SEC and CFTC joint meeting focused on digital asset oversight, while the Senate Agriculture Committee also postponed its market structure bill markup due to a winter storm.
The SEC’s Crypto Task Force issued a response that aligns with Ripple’s concerns about how speculation is treated under the CLARITY Act, signaling a growing debate over the boundaries of securities regulation. The submission, posted publicly on the agency’s website, argues that buying a token with hopes of price appreciation should not automatically trigger federal oversight. The exchange highlights ongoing tensions as lawmakers continue shaping the evolving digital asset market structure.
Ripple’s Concerns Gain Traction Inside Regulatory Circles
Attorney Teresa Goody Guillen authored the response, echoing Ripple’s argument that passive economic interest should not be the sole factor determining whether a digital asset falls under securities laws. She emphasized that speculation alone does not equate to investor rights, referencing prior academic work to support the distinction. Her comments reinforce Ripple’s position that the current draft framework risks conflating market behavior with legal entitlements.
SEC Input Clarifies Limits of the Response
Guillen noted that her submission does not represent binding guidance or official policy. Instead, it serves as public input responding to Ripple’s January 9 letter, which challenged several elements of the market structure draft bill. Ripple argued that decentralization should not be used as a governing legal metric and that passive economic interests should not automatically impose securities obligations. The exchange underscores the complexity of defining digital asset classifications.
Draft Proposal Introduces Digital Value Instruments
Separately, Guillen released a discussion draft for the Digital Markets Restructure Act of 2026, proposing a new category called Digital Value Instruments for assets that do not fit existing securities or commodities definitions. To qualify, a cryptocurrency would need at least three of five characteristics, including free transferability, passive economic interest, limited contractual rights, systemic dependency on a sponsor, or lacking mechanisms to discipline or replace systems influencing value or operations.
Regulatory Coordination Intensifies Ahead of Key Meeting
The publication of these submissions arrives just before a joint SEC and CFTC meeting scheduled for Thursday to discuss digital asset regulatory coordination. The harmonization event, initially planned for Tuesday, was delayed due to scheduling adjustments and will feature a fireside chat with SEC Chair Paul Atkins and CFTC Chair Mike Selig. Meanwhile, the Senate Agriculture Committee postponed its markup of the crypto market structure bill following a severe winter storm.
