Lack of Clarity on Ethereum’s Status
Republican lawmakers have raised concerns about the Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) lack of transparency regarding Ethereum’s (ETH) classification. They argue that Ethereum is a non-security asset, but the SEC’s Special Purpose Broker-Dealer (SPBD) framework does not allow for the custody of such assets.
Potential Consequences
The lawmakers warn that allowing Prometheum to offer custody services for ETH under the current framework could have serious consequences for the digital asset market. They urge the SEC to clarify its position on the following:
- Can SPBDs hold non-security digital assets?
- How will the SEC address non-compliance by SPBDs?
- What is Ethereum’s regulatory classification?
- What is the SEC’s stance on Prometheum’s recent announcement?
Confusion and Uncertainty
The lawmakers also criticize the SEC for failing to provide a clear definition of “digital asset securities” and comprehensive guidance for asset classification. They express disappointment with the SEC Chair’s refusal to acknowledge Ethereum as a non-security asset, which has contributed to confusion and uncertainty.
Call for Resolution
The lawmakers emphasize the need for regulatory clarity and a comprehensive approach to digital asset classification. They urge the SEC to address their concerns promptly to minimize uncertainty and foster growth in the digital asset ecosystem. The SEC has not yet formally responded to the letter, but the industry awaits further developments as the regulatory landscape for digital assets continues to evolve.
