SEC receives competing industry proposals on crypto ETF regulation ahead of Aug. 31 comment deadline; divergent positions may delay approval timelines for new structures.
Regulation & Gov ·
Industry participants including a16z, Grayscale, and the Crypto Council for Innovation submitted competing proposals to the SEC ahead of the Aug. 31 comment deadline on novel exchange-traded products. The submissions diverged significantly on key regulatory questions: CCI urged the SEC to extend ETF-style efficiencies to non-ETF products, while a16z argued the agency should assess products individually rather than apply uniform rules, and advocated for shorter review timelines coordinating fund registration with exchange listing procedures. Disagreements extended to confidential filings, with Grayscale supporting optional confidential consultations and Charles Schwab opposing a fully confidential process.
The split positions reflect broader tensions over how to structure regulation for emerging crypto-asset products beyond spot Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs. Commenters also differed on staking features, event contracts, and retail investor safeguards, indicating the complexity of modernizing existing frameworks to accommodate new strategies and asset classes under the Investment Company Act of 1940.
The diverging industry stances may slow final rulemaking timelines. No consensus emerged on whether the SEC should modify the definition of investment company, confidentiality procedures, or disclosure coordination between regulators—leaving open how quickly new crypto ETF structures beyond current spot offerings could receive approval.