SEC Chair Paul Atkins: Most Crypto Assets Are Not Securities, New Era of Regulation Just Beginning

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) Chairman Paul Atkins delivered a speech at the Practicing Law Institute on Thursday, clearly stating that this interpretation “is just the beginning, not the end,” and emphasizing that the SEC will adopt a markedly different approach from past “enforcement regulation” in dealing with digital assets. According to the SEC framework, “only one category of crypto assets remains subject to securities laws,” while most other cryptocurrencies are outside the SEC’s jurisdiction.

Core Exemptions in the SEC Interpretive Notice Framework

Atkins further clarified the specific boundaries of the SEC’s new interpretation during Thursday’s speech. Under this framework, the following digital asset categories are generally not subject to the SEC’s federal securities law jurisdiction:

Digital Commodities: Cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, Ethereum, XRP, Solana, Dogecoin, which the SEC recognizes as commodities

Digital Tools: Utility tokens with specific platform functionalities

Digital Collectibles: Unique digital assets including non-fungible tokens (NFTs)

Stablecoins: Payment-type stablecoins (digital dollar assets pegged to fiat currency)

The only category continuously subject to SEC securities laws is “tokenized traditional securities”—that is, tokens representing existing stocks, bonds, and other traditional financial instruments on the blockchain.

Atkins emphasized that after the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) signed a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) last week, the SEC’s primary task is to clarify how federal securities laws apply to cryptocurrencies under the new framework, rather than shaping regulatory boundaries through enforcement actions—marking a clear departure from the previous “litigation instead of legislation” approach.

Legislative Progress of the CLARITY Act and White House Initiatives

Although the SEC’s interpretive notice has provided some immediate clarity to the market, more legally binding legislative efforts are also underway. Known as the “Digital Asset Market Structure Act” or the CLARITY Act, it was passed by the House of Representatives in July 2025 and is currently facing more complex coordination in the Senate.

On Thursday, a spokesperson for Wyoming Republican Senator Cynthia Lummis confirmed to the media that Republican senators held a closed-door meeting with White House crypto advisor Patrick Witter to discuss advancing the Market Structure Act.

The outcome of the meeting has been cautiously optimistic within the industry. Lummis’s office described the meeting as “very productive and positive,” and revealed that legislators have reached “99% consensus” on the core contentious issue—stablecoin yields—that previously hindered progress. Negotiations on the digital asset provisions in the CLARITY Act are also “progressing smoothly.”

Currently, the Senate Agriculture Committee advanced its version of the bill in January, but the Senate Banking Committee has yet to schedule a vote on the CLARITY Act as of Thursday. The main remaining obstacle is the stablecoin yield dispute.

Frequently Asked Questions

Does the SEC’s interpretive notice have legal effect, or can it be overturned by the next chairman?

The SEC’s interpretive notice is an administrative agency’s interpretation of existing laws. Technically, a successor chairman can modify or overturn it by issuing a new notice, and it does not have the same permanent legal authority as legislation passed by Congress. For this reason, Atkins has repeatedly emphasized the importance of Congress passing the CLARITY Act—only legislation can provide a durable framework for cryptocurrency regulation across changes in government.

If stablecoins are no longer under SEC jurisdiction, who will regulate stablecoins?

According to the SEC’s new interpretive framework, payment-type stablecoins are outside the SEC’s securities law jurisdiction. However, this does not create a regulatory vacuum for stablecoins. Under the ongoing efforts of the CLARITY Act and the parallel GENUIS Act (which proposes specific legislation for stablecoins), regulation may be jointly handled by the CFTC (if deemed a commodity) or federal banking regulators. The final framework remains to be determined through legislation.

Does “99% consensus” mean the CLARITY Act is close to passing?

The “99% consensus” described by Lummis’s office is a positive indication of progress on key negotiations, suggesting that the main obstacle—stablecoin yields—is nearing resolution. However, the legislation is not yet finalized. It still requires committee votes, reconciliation of different versions in both chambers, and presidential signing. While progress is promising, history shows that near-completion can often be derailed by new disagreements, so cautious optimism is advised.