According to external sources, the United States Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has placed a special code for encryption called “Regulation Crypto” on its agenda in July 2026 and is currently under review by the White House Office of Information and Regulatory Services. According to the article, this rule, if landed, may lead to the completion of some of the institutional arrangements of greatest interest to the United States encryption industry without a vote in Congress.

Exemption from proposed token sales registration

In the framework of article disclosure, this rule consists mainly of three parts.

  • Time-limited registration exemption for early encryption projects
  • Allow eligible projects to finance up to $75 million within 12 months
  • Set up a safe harbour for exit security attributes for tokens

Of these, the exemption period for early projects may be up to four years. According to the article, the discussion revolved around the start-up project and could be applied to a team of less than $5 million over the first four years. At the same time, such projects could continue to use other financing immunity channels under the United States Federal Securities Act in parallel.

Deactivate security properties after centralization

According to the article, the most interesting part is the so-called “decentralized safe harbour”. Under this scenario, if a token network no longer relies on the issuer or the core team for continuous management efforts, the token may be withdrawn from the securities recognition upon fulfilment of the conditions.

This means that the SEC is trying to provide more explicit administrative rules for “when the token is no longer a security”, rather than relying solely on past speeches, staff guidelines or case law enforcement. The article also mentioned that DeFi and monetized securities were also explicitly included in the scope of application and that eligible activities were protected by law enforcement.

It's harder to overturn the official rules.

The central judgement of the article is that the industry has recently focused on parliamentary bills, but that the stability of formal rules is not necessarily weaker. The reason for this is that the Committee ' s interpretation, staff calibre or law enforcement attitude may vary over time, and once formal rules are in place, future revocation will usually require a re-entry into the full rule-making process and judicial review.

According to the article, even if Congress continues to pull saws around encryption legislation, the SEC, if it promotes this rule alone, may first deliver several of the most important elements of the market's interest, including the token sales exemption, the financing line arrangement and the exit route of the token out of the security attribute.

Controversy focused on the threshold and concentration of power

However, the article also states that this path is not equivalent to legislation. The SEC could not individually redraw the regulatory division with the United States Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) nor could it be a substitute for Congress to develop a longer-term legal framework.

A more realistic dispute would fall at a specific threshold, including the application criteria for early projects, the level of funding, the disclosure requirements and when the project would be truly decentrized. If these conditions are too stringent, the practical scope of application of the rules may be limited, although the rules may nominally relax their issuance.

It is also argued that if the encryption industry in the United States ultimately relies primarily on a single regulator to set exemptions, the policy direction will continue to be affected by the turnover of the Commission. This is one of the reasons why the market is following up on the public consultation stage.