Six major blockchain organizations are pressing the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to strengthen the legal foundations of its crypto policy, seeking explicit recognition that digital commodities are not securities.
Chainlink Labs, the Cardano Foundation, Hedera, Aptos Labs, Ava Labs and the Stellar Development Foundation submitted a joint comment on the day matching the deadline for feedback on the SEC’s proposed Regulation Crypto Assets.
Their intervention brings organizations associated with LINK, ADA, HBAR, APT, AVAX and XLM behind a shared regulatory request.
However, the filing is a response to an ongoing rulemaking process, rather than an announcement of a new commercial partnership.
The Push Is About Making Existing Recognition More Durable
The organizations want the SEC’s digital commodity classification incorporated into the operative text of its proposed rules.
Their argument is that the proposal relies on an existing classification framework without fully embedding it in the regulation. Writing the distinction directly into the rules would, they contend, provide greater certainty for developers and market participants.
Importantly, the SEC already identifies all six associated tokens as examples of digital commodities in its educational guidance. The groups are therefore seeking to reinforce an existing position rather than obtain an entirely new designation.
The agency describes digital commodities as assets needed to participate in functional crypto systems, deriving value from those systems’ programmatic operation and supply-and-demand dynamics. That differs from a tokenized security representing a conventional financial instrument.
The practical issue is predictability: businesses choosing where to develop blockchain infrastructure want confidence that today’s regulatory interpretation will remain a reliable foundation for tomorrow’s decisions.
Secondary Trading and Safe Harbors Are Central to the Request
The letter also asks the SEC to distinguish an underlying digital commodity from an investment contract involving that asset.
A token’s involvement in a securities transaction should not automatically transform the token itself into a security, the organizations argue.
They seek a presumption that secondary-market sales by non-issuers do not involve investment contracts when outstanding issuer promises of essential managerial efforts are absent.
Another request concerns the proposed investment-contract safe harbor. Using it should not constitute an admission that an investment contract previously existed, while declining to use it should not create the opposite presumption.
The organizations also ask the SEC to preserve its existing classifications and the respective authorities of the SEC and Commodity Futures Trading Commission.
These requests build on the agencies’ March interpretation, which addressed how non-security assets can become subject to investment contracts and later cease to be.
That guidance also covered protocol staking, mining, airdrops and wrapping, placing network participation within the broader regulatory discussion.
A Meaningful Shift Is Possible, but No New Rule Is Final
The SEC proposed Regulation Crypto Assets on Aug. 18, with publication in the Federal Register on Aug. 21.
The proposal would introduce two fundraising exemptions: one allowing offerings of up to $5 million over four years, and another permitting up to $75 million during each 12-month period.
Issuers would provide principles-based disclosures and remain subject to antifraud and antimanipulation requirements. A conditional safe harbor would also address when assets cease to be subject to investment contracts.
Those mechanisms remain proposals. Closing the comment period does not make them effective or establish that the SEC will accept the six organizations’ recommendations.
If adopted, clearer distinctions could reduce uncertainty surrounding fundraising, trading and blockchain development. The immediate significance is coordinated industry pressure to turn interpretive policy into more durable regulation.
For token holders, the filing offers no automatic price catalyst or exemption from every financial rule. The next consequential development will be the SEC’s final text and whether it explicitly incorporates the protections these organizations are requesting.
Top Trending Crypto Articles
