The US Securities and Stock Exchange Committee (SEC) is facing increasing criticism from the current and former officials on its advanced position on the STAKING CRYPTO services.
On May 29, the SEC Entrepreneur Financing Department issued new guidelines on Stokeing Crypto Services, claiming that some offers may not constitute securities and effectively reporting the evidence of registration requirements under the Securities Law.
However, SEC’s new interpretation may differ from many provisions of the Federal Court, according to the former Internet enforcement president, John Reed Stark.
In a statement on X, Stark Argue The latest step for the committee in the judicial results in prominent cases against Binance and Coinbase, as judges previously allowed allegations that the products of qualifying products qualified under a long -term legal precedent.
“This is the way the Supreme Education Council dies – in an ordinary offer,” Stark wrote in a lengthy response to the agency, describing the shift as “shameful waiver of the task of protecting investors.”
As for Binance, while SEC claimed that Stokeing services on the stock exchange were not registered securities offers, the case was eventually rejected in prejudice in May 2025, preventing the agency from submitting similar claims. Likewise, in March 2024, a federal judge allowed the Agency’s case against Coinbase to move forward, indicating that SEC had pledged enough that Staking involves unregistered offer and selling securities. The case was also rejected in February 2025 as part of a broader shift in the SEC approach to regulating encryption.
On May 29, the sitting commissioner Caroline Crincho issued a statement in response to the agency’s approach to the encryption leadership, warning The employees’ conclusions were not in line with the applicable jurisdiction or the Howe.
“The analysis of employees may reflect what some want to be the law, but it does not learn with the court’s decisions regarding the interest and the precedent of the bet that is based on it,” he wrote, adding:
“This is another example of the” fake “approach so that we can make it” in taking measures – taking action based on the anticipation of future changes while ignoring the current law. “
The committee recently made a series of steps digging on digital assets, including closure, investigations, dropping lawsuits and release round materials to discuss the organization with the participants in the industry.
“This encrypted edge,” Stark wrote.
Related to: SEC’s Crenshaw Slams a wavy settlement, warns of “organizational void”
While the Securities and Stock Exchange Committee has put its last actions as part of an attempt to provide organizational clarity, critics claim that the result was more confusion.
In the June 2 statement, Crenshaw interrogation The consistency of the committee’s approach, referring to the cases that the agency seemed to address some digital assets, such as ether symbols (ETH) and Solana (Sol), as securities.
“How is these encryption assets are supposed to be securities when it comes to registration requirements, but they are comfortable are securities when the recorder sees an opportunity to sell a new product?”
Speaking at the Bitcoin 2025 conference in Las Vegas, Nevada, Commissioner Hyster Peres retreated from the new agency’s criticism of encryption, indicating that the classification of securities transaction depends more on the nature of the deal more than the same origin:
“Most of the encryption assets, as we see them today, are not the same securities. This does not mean that you cannot sell a symbolic symbol in itself safely in treatment is the treatment of securities. This is where we really need to provide some directives.”
magazine: Deposit risks: What do you really do the exchange of encryption with your money?
Related Articles
