The SEC Finally Drew the Line on Crypto. Here's What It Means.

For more than a decade, the single most expensive question in crypto had no official answer: is this token a security? On March 22, 2026, the SEC and CFTC jointly published interpretive guidance that attempts — for the first time in a structured, formal way — to answer it.

The short answer: most crypto assets are not securities. The longer answer is where things get complicated.

What the Guidance Actually Says

The SEC laid out five categories of crypto assets: digital securities, payment stablecoins, digital tools, digital collectibles, and digital commodities. Only the first category — digital securities — falls under the SEC's direct jurisdiction. Everything else, by default, sits outside its purview.

The test for whether something is a digital security remains the Howey Test, the same legal framework courts have used since 1946. If a token involves an investment of money in a common enterprise with an expectation of profit from others' efforts, it's a security. If not, it isn't.

SEC Chair Paul Atkins, alongside Commissioners Hester Peirce and Mark Uyeda, put it plainly in a CoinDesk op-ed: "Most crypto assets are not securities." The CFTC co-signed the guidance and confirmed it would administer non-security crypto assets under the Commodity Exchange Act.

The CFTC also separately issued a no-action letter allowing a non-custodial wallet provider to facilitate derivatives and prediction market transactions — a notable step toward legitimizing decentralized financial infrastructure.

The Fine Print That Still Matters

Here's where the guidance gets nuanced — and where legal professionals are urging caution.

Sponsored

Advertise with Us

[email protected]

Sponsored

Chris LaVigne, a partner at Withers, noted that the guidance "predictably concludes that most crypto assets and many common crypto activities are not securities," but pointed out that the SEC retained meaningful discretion. The critical caveat: a non-security token can still be sold as part of an investment contract if it's marketed with promises of profit tied to the issuer's managerial efforts. In other words, the asset itself isn't the issue — the pitch is.

This shifts the regulatory lens from what a token is to how it's sold. A token classified as a digital commodity today could trigger securities enforcement tomorrow if its issuer makes the wrong promises in a roadshow or whitepaper.

Jason Gottlieb of Morrison Cohen raised a different concern: the jurisdictional gap. The CFTC's authority over non-security crypto is not yet codified in statute. "Just because the SEC does not have jurisdiction does not mean the CFTC does," he said. He's currently involved in a Seventh Circuit case seeking clarity on exactly this question. Until Congress passes market structure legislation, this gap remains legally unresolved.

Will Congress Close the Gap?

The guidance is administrative interpretation — not law. A future administration could reverse it. That's why lawmakers and industry participants are pushing for statutory certainty.

Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) told the DC Blockchain Summit she expects a markup of market structure legislation in the final weeks of April. The sticking point has been stablecoin yield — specifically, whether stablecoin issuers can describe returns using bank-like language. A late-Friday report from Politico suggested Senators Angela Alsobrooks and Thom Tillis had reached an agreement on yield, though details hadn't been shared with the industry at press time.

Senator Tim Scott (R-SC), chair of the Senate Banking Committee, said lawmakers are close on ethics and quorum provisions — two other outstanding issues. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) expressed optimism that a markup would lead to a merged Senate Banking and Agriculture Committee bill.

Representative Troy Downing (R-MT) framed the stakes bluntly: "Just having another two or three years of this and then having ambiguity out there doesn't make most people comfortable on doing any kind of big investment." He called the guidance "a great start" but said legislation was essential — and that the window narrows significantly as the midterm election approaches.

There's also a wrinkle: if the Clarity Act passes, it may require the SEC to revisit how it defines crypto securities entirely, potentially sending the agency back to the drawing board on some of what this guidance establishes.

The Prediction Markets Sideshow

While the guidance dominated headlines, Kalshi — the federally regulated prediction market platform — had a rough week on a different front. Arizona filed criminal charges against the company, alleging that certain election and sports-related contracts violate state law. Nevada courts ordered Kalshi to halt sports, election, and entertainment event contracts for at least two weeks, pending a hearing on April 3.

Nevada Judge Jason Woodbury wrote that "the question of federal preemption in this regard is nuanced and rapidly evolving," and that current legal authority weighs against federal preemption in this context. The takeaway: even as federal regulators clarify their stance, state-level enforcement remains a live and independent variable — particularly for products that touch gambling or election law.