SEC New Rules Interpretation: Over 16 Tokens Classified as Digital Commodities, How Will the Regulatory Paradigm Reshape the Market?

On March 17, 2026, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) jointly issued a 68-page interpretive guidance, officially ending nearly a decade of regulatory uncertainty in the crypto industry. SEC Chair Paul Atkins subsequently stated, “Most crypto assets are not securities,” marking a fundamental shift in U.S. federal regulatory logic from “enforcement first” to “rules first.” Market dubbed this document the “Token Classification Law,” which not only grants digital assets a legal “ID card” but also could serve as the engine for a new regulatory bull market.

How the Regulatory Watershed Was Formed

The core of this regulatory shift lies in the SEC’s first formal interpretive statement at the commission level, systematically answering the fundamental question “What is a security?” The new guidance classifies crypto assets into five categories: digital commodities, digital collectibles, digital tools, stablecoins, and digital securities, clarifying that the first four under certain conditions are not securities. Among them, 16 mainstream tokens such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, and XRP are explicitly named as “digital commodities,” clearing previous suspicions of securities attached to enforcement actions. Unlike non-binding statements from staff in the past, this guidance has higher legal authority, directly replacing the 2019 “Digital Asset Investment Contract Analysis Framework.” This is not only a clarification of technical details but also a leap in regulatory philosophy—from presuming “everything is a security” to a substantive judgment based on asset function and network decentralization.

How Tokens Are “Unbound” from Security Status

For projects that have undergone an initial coin offering (ICO) or private placement, the most ingenious aspect of the new rules is the introduction of the “Attach-and-Detach” mechanism. Its legal logic is: a land deed for an orange grove is not a security, but if the sale includes a promise that “the seller will cultivate and share profits,” the transaction constitutes an investment contract. Similarly, a token during fundraising may be “attached” with security attributes if it includes promises of future development; but once the network is operational and no longer relies on the founding team’s key management efforts, the attribute can be “detached.” The SEC clarifies that the standard for detachment is whether the project team has disclosed and ceased statements that could lead investors to expect profits “dependent on the efforts of others.” This mechanism provides a clear compliance path for thousands of existing projects and offers verifiable legal grounds for exchanges to relist assets.

Structural Costs of Classification-Based Regulation

Any clarification of a regulatory framework comes with explicit compliance costs. Assets classified as “digital securities”—mainly tokenized traditional financial assets—must fully adhere to existing securities laws regarding registration, disclosure, and reporting, limiting their liquidity to compliant trading venues and qualified investors. For issuers, regardless of classification, early-stage projects must hire legal experts to conduct detailed “Howey tests” and retain comprehensive decision documentation. While the guidance proposes safe harbor ideas (e.g., a four-year, $5 million fundraising cap for startups), these are still in consultation, and in the short term, legal burdens for projects may increase rather than decrease. Additionally, the SEC explicitly retains the right to reclassify assets based on their functional evolution, meaning a “non-security” label is not necessarily permanent.

Deep Impact on Industry Structure

Enhanced regulatory clarity is fundamentally changing the underlying business logic of the crypto industry. First, the listing logic for projects and exchanges will change—past strategies relying on regulatory evasion and exploiting legal gray areas will become ineffective, replaced by compliance-based competition rooted in asset classification. Second, it clears the biggest hurdle for institutional capital entry. The global wealth management industry manages about $100 trillion, with traditional 60/40 stock-bond allocations under pressure. The emergence of compliant crypto assets offers new diversification options. Once pension funds, mutual funds, and registered investment advisors (RIAs) begin large-scale allocations, their capital will far surpass municipal and retail investors. Furthermore, spot ETFs will accelerate their asset spectrum expansion, with tokens like SOL, XRP, and ADA, now classified as digital commodities, having clearer approval pathways for ETF applications. Lastly, the legal status of DeFi and staking services is confirmed, granting on-chain native business models regulatory recognition.

Potential Paths for Capital Migration

The implementation of this regulatory framework will trigger multi-layered capital flows. First, compliant funds will unlock. Previously deterred by legal risks, domestic venture capital and family offices in the U.S. will start allocating to “clearly safe” digital commodities like BTC and ETH. Second, wealth management channels will open. When major brokerages and custodians include compliant tokens in their standard offerings, RIAs will be able to recommend crypto assets as easily as tech stocks, leading to sustained and stable capital inflows. Third, on-chain acceleration of real-world assets (RWA) tokenization will occur. As the paths for stablecoins and tokenized government bonds become clear, more traditional assets will choose to issue on public blockchains, blurring the line between crypto markets and traditional finance. Ultimately, a new cycle driven by compliance, led by institutions, and fueled by native innovation will gradually form.

Risks and Policy Variables Not to Be Overlooked

Despite the long-term benefits of the new guidance, short-term risks remain. First, the legislative process for related laws is incomplete—The CLARITY Act is still under Senate review, and key issues like whether stablecoins can pay interest remain unresolved, leaving gaps in the final regulatory puzzle. Second, macroeconomic pressures persist. The Federal Reserve’s rate path, geopolitical conflicts, and global liquidity contraction could offset the positive impact of regulation on prices. Currently, the market’s “Fear & Greed Index” remains in panic territory, reflecting ongoing caution among investors amid macro and regulatory uncertainties. Lastly, beware of the “drop-the-bike” effect—when long-anticipated benefits materialize, short-term prices may face selling pressure. Historical experience shows that the true benefits of systemic reforms often only emerge after sentiment subsides and capital is realigned.

Summary

The joint guidance from the SEC and CFTC is not the end of regulation but the true beginning of compliance. By establishing a clear token classification system and the “Attach-and-Detach” mechanism, it paves the way for crypto assets to shift from “presumed illegal” to “default compliant.” The greatest significance of this shift is not sparking a short-term bull run but creating a legal infrastructure for trillions of dollars in institutional capital to enter, understand, and operate within. For market participants, the rules are set—now the real game begins.

FAQ

1. Under the new guidance, which mainstream crypto assets are explicitly not securities? According to the SEC’s guidance, 16 tokens are directly named as “digital commodities”: BTC, ETH, SOL, ADA, AVAX, DOT, XRP, LINK, DOGE, SHIB, LTC, APT, HBAR, XLM, XTZ, BCH. Additionally, stablecoins meeting certain conditions, most meme coins, and digital collectibles (NFTs) are excluded from the securities definition.

2. What is the “Attach-and-Detach” mechanism? What does it mean for projects? It’s the core principle explaining how investment contract relationships can end. A token during fundraising may be “attached” with security features if it includes promises of future development; but once the network is operational and no longer relies on the founders’ key efforts, the security attribute can be “detached.” This provides a clear compliance path for projects that conducted ICOs.

3. Does the new guidance mean all crypto assets can be freely traded in the U.S.? No. It clarifies that “digital securities” (tokenized stocks, bonds, etc.) still must comply with securities laws. Even non-security assets, when traded, must meet AML, investor suitability, and other regulatory requirements on trading platforms and brokerages.

4. What direct impact does this regulation have on ordinary investors? The main benefit is increased legal certainty. Investors can reduce black-swan risks like delisting or liquidity crunches caused by projects being classified as “unregistered securities.” Long-term, more compliant crypto investment products (e.g., additional spot ETFs) are expected to enter traditional finance channels, lowering investment barriers.

5. Will new crypto-related laws be introduced in the U.S. after this clarification? Yes. The guidance interprets existing laws, but Congress is still advancing comprehensive market structure legislation, such as the CLARITY and GENIUS Acts (stablecoin legislation). Their passage will provide a more solid legal foundation for regulation.