$BTC Primary Market Golden Dog Conan

SEC Draft Opens a New Chapter: Crypto Regulation Shifts from Enforcement to Rules, but Uncertainties Remain

For the first time in its five-year strategic plan, the SEC explicitly embeds digital assets into the core goal of “supporting innovation and capital formation.” This draft marks a fundamental shift in regulatory thinking: moving away from the prior approach that relied on case-by-case enforcement—“enforcement as a substitute for rules”—toward a systematic framework led by “rules first.”

**Core Change: Rules Replace Enforcement**

Previously, the SEC mainly constrained the crypto industry through the Howey test and enforcement actions that increased year by year—launching 46 cases in 2023 alone. The draft explicitly criticizes this model for “creating greater uncertainty,” and proposes that enforcement should return to Congress’s original intent: focus on targeting fraud rather than expanding the regulatory boundary through individual cases. The measuring standard also changes to “deterrence effects and clear guidance,” instead of the number of cases.

At the same time, the draft introduces “cost-benefit analysis” for the first time, acknowledging that excessive regulation can harm market efficiency and capital formation. This contrasts with the earlier single goal of “protecting investors.”

**Multiple Preludes to a Policy Shift**

Since Paul Atkins became SEC Chair in 2025, the SEC has concluded multiple lawsuits against crypto companies, approved several crypto ETFs, and signed a regulatory coordination memorandum with the CFTC. In April 2026, Atkins said at the Bitcoin conference that he would abandon the “ostrich policy.” This draft is the institutionalization of these policy shifts—its continuity is higher than that of executive orders, even if the government changes.

**Direct Impact on Institutions: “Legal Certainty” Becomes the Keyword**

“Legal certainty,” which the draft emphasizes repeatedly, directly targets the pain point for institutions entering the market. The SEC and CFTC have jointly classified 15 assets such as BTC as “digital commodities,” but this administrative guidance carries the risk of being overturned. The real breakthrough depends on whether Congress’s Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (CLARITY) can pass, so that the classification can be permanently written into law. In addition, compliance pathways for business areas including custody, trading, staking, and tokenized issuance are also clarified in the draft.

However, it should be noted: the strategic plan itself is not legally binding. The real change still depends on legislation and subsequent rulemaking.

**Three Major Controversies Have Not Been Resolved Yet**

1. **Stablecoin yield issue:** The CLARITY bill is set to prohibit stablecoins from paying interest to holders, triggering strong opposition from the industry. Currently, a compromise proposal allows “activity-linked rewards” but bans “passive balance income.”
2. **SEC jurisdictional boundary:** Critics argue that the SEC’s past enforcement has lacked clear legal authority, and this issue will need to be resolved through the CLARITY bill.
3. **Reversibility of administrative guidance:** In the future, future SEC chairs could overturn existing asset classifications at any time. If there is no legislative backstop, the market will return to uncertainty.

**Future Outlook: Legislation, International Competition, and Infrastructure Upgrades**

The CLARITY bill passed the Senate Banking Committee in May 2026 by a 15:9 vote, and the White House plans to sign it before July 4. If it passes, it will provide a federal legal classification framework. At the same time, international regulation such as the EU’s MiCA is also accelerating. The draft’s wording about “ensuring the best business environment in the U.S.” reflects the pressure of institutional competition. Additionally, the SEC itself is exploring ways to improve regulatory efficiency using AI and blockchain technology.

2026–2030 may be a critical window for U.S. crypto regulation to shift from being enforcement-driven to being rule-driven. But for investors, the risk of policy reversals remains, and decisions should be built on independent research.