qerranews 
The US Securities and Exchange Commission’s (SEC) Crypto Task Force has publicly echoed concerns raised by Ripple regarding how cryptocurrencies should be regulated under federal securities laws. The response comes amid ongoing debates over the proposed CLARITY Act, a sweeping crypto market structure bill being discussed by US lawmakers.
In a response published on the SEC’s website, digital asset regulation attorney Teresa Goody Guillen argued that speculation alone should not automatically subject cryptocurrencies to securities laws. She emphasized that merely buying a token in hopes that its price will rise does not necessarily create an investment contract or securities obligation.
Guillen’s comments were submitted as public input to the SEC and do not represent official agency policy. However, the submission signals a growing openness within regulatory circles to reconsider how digital assets are classified and regulated in the United States.
Passive Economic Interest Debate
One of the core issues raised in the submission is the concept of “passive economic interest.” Guillen argued that frameworks treating passive speculation as a trigger for securities laws mistakenly conflate speculation with investor rights.
She cited Ripple’s earlier submission, which warned that simply holding a digital asset for potential price appreciation should not be treated the same as holding shares in a company or having contractual rights tied to an issuer. Instead, Guillen proposed that digital assets should be assessed using a broader set of factors applied on a sliding scale.
This approach would move away from a rigid classification system and toward a more nuanced framework that accounts for how tokens function in practice.
Ripple Flags CLARITY Act Issues
Ripple’s Jan. 9 submission to lawmakers highlighted several concerns with the draft crypto market structure bill. The company argued that decentralization should not be used as a primary legal metric when determining regulatory classification.
Ripple also reiterated that passive economic interest should not automatically trigger securities laws, warning that such a framework could stifle innovation and misclassify many decentralized protocols and tokens.
By raising these concerns, Ripple positioned itself as a key voice in shaping future US crypto policy, especially as Congress debates how to regulate digital asset markets more clearly.
New Digital Asset Classification Proposal
In a separate development, Guillen published a discussion draft for the “Digital Markets Restructure Act of 2026.” The proposal introduces a new classification for cryptocurrencies called “Digital Value Instruments.”
This category would apply to digital assets that do not neatly fit existing definitions of securities or commodities. Under the draft, a cryptocurrency would qualify as a Digital Value Instrument if it meets at least three of the following five characteristics:
- Free transferability
- Passive economic interest for holders
- Limited individual contractual rights
- Systemic dependency on an enterprise or protocol sponsor
- Lack of mechanisms to discipline or replace the systems affecting its value or operations
This proposed framework aims to bridge the gap between traditional financial regulations and emerging decentralized technologies.
Risk-Based Jurisdiction and Safe Harbors
The draft legislation also suggests a risk-based jurisdictional approach for the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). This would clarify which agency oversees specific types of digital assets, reducing regulatory overlap and uncertainty.
Additionally, the proposal calls for federal preemption of inconsistent state laws and the introduction of safe harbor provisions. These measures are designed to support innovation while maintaining investor protection.
If adopted, such reforms could significantly reshape the US crypto regulatory landscape, offering clearer guidelines for developers, exchanges, and investors.
SEC–CFTC Meeting on Crypto Regulation
The publication of these submissions comes ahead of a joint SEC–CFTC meeting scheduled for Thursday. The meeting will focus on regulatory coordination for digital assets and is expected to influence future policy decisions.
Originally scheduled for Tuesday, the event was delayed due to a severe winter storm in the United States. The meeting will include a fireside chat featuring SEC Chair Paul Atkins and CFTC Chair Mike Selig, highlighting the importance of inter-agency collaboration in crypto regulation.
The US Senate Agriculture Committee also postponed its markup for the crypto market structure bill due to the storm, further delaying legislative progress.
What This Means for Crypto Markets
The SEC task force’s acknowledgment of Ripple’s concerns and the proposal of a new digital asset classification reflect a broader shift in regulatory thinking. As digital assets continue to evolve, regulators are grappling with how to apply decades-old securities laws to decentralized technologies.
Introducing categories like Digital Value Instruments could provide much-needed clarity for projects that do not fit traditional definitions. It may also reduce regulatory uncertainty for exchanges, developers, and institutional investors exploring blockchain-based assets.
However, the proposals remain in draft form and have not been approved by SEC or CFTC leadership. Their eventual adoption will depend on legislative negotiations, regulatory consensus, and political priorities.
Conclusion
The ongoing debate over the CLARITY Act and crypto asset classification highlights a critical moment for the digital asset industry. Ripple’s advocacy for clearer and more nuanced regulations has found support within the SEC’s Crypto Task Force, signaling potential shifts in how cryptocurrencies are regulated in the United States.
As lawmakers, regulators, and industry leaders continue discussions, the introduction of new classifications like Digital Value Instruments could pave the way for a more balanced regulatory framework. The upcoming SEC–CFTC meeting and congressional debates will be key milestones in shaping the future of US crypto regulation.
For crypto markets, this regulatory rethink could mark the beginning of a more structured, innovation-friendly environment—one that balances investor protection with technological progress.