The SEC has clarified that certain liquid staking models do not constitute securities offerings, providing a clearer regulatory framework for Ethereum-based staking protocols. SEC draws the line on liquid staking On Aug. 5, the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s Division…The SEC has clarified that certain liquid staking models do not constitute securities offerings, providing a clearer regulatory framework for Ethereum-based staking protocols. SEC draws the line on liquid staking On Aug. 5, the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s Division…

SEC clarity on liquid staking strengthens Ethereum’s investment case

The SEC has clarified that certain liquid staking models do not constitute securities offerings, providing a clearer regulatory framework for Ethereum-based staking protocols.

Summary
  • The SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance issued a staff-level statement clarifying that properly structured liquid staking arrangements do not qualify as securities under federal law.
  • Liquid staking models that rely on smart contracts and avoid discretionary control by providers may operate outside the scope of the Howey test.
  • Receipt tokens such as stETH and rETH are not considered securities when they reflect ownership of non-security assets and are issued through administrative processes.
  • The SEC’s interpretation offers legal clarity for Ethereum’s staking infrastructure and may support increased adoption across developer, institutional, and DeFi environments.

Table of Contents

  • SEC draws the line on liquid staking
  • What liquid staking is and how it works
  • Lido, Rocket Pool, and what qualifies
  • ETH price and market impact

SEC draws the line on liquid staking

On Aug. 5, the US Securities and Exchange Commission’s Division of Corporation Finance released a formal staff statement clarifying how liquid staking fits within federal securities laws. 

According to the Division, properly structured liquid staking programs do not meet the legal definition of a security under Section 2(a)(1) of the Securities Act of 1933 or Section 3(a)(10) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934.

The statement builds on earlier interpretations of self-staking and custodial staking models but now defines a distinct fourth category: liquid staking, which issues receipt tokens to represent ownership of staked assets. 

In structures that meet regulatory criteria, these receipt tokens are not considered securities either, provided they merely reflect ownership and are not tied to the actions or discretion of a third party.

The staff found that qualified liquid staking arrangements avoid investment contract classification because they lack entrepreneurial or managerial oversight. 

Service providers in such models perform only administrative functions — routing assets to validators, managing wallets or smart contracts, and issuing tokens without exercising judgment over staking strategy or timing. 

The absence of discretion means they do not satisfy the “efforts of others” requirement of the Howey test, which remains the SEC’s key framework for identifying investment contracts.

SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins called the update “a significant step forward in clarifying the staff’s view about crypto asset activities that do not fall within the SEC’s jurisdiction.” 

He added that the SEC’s Project Crypto initiative is already “producing results for the American people,” signaling a more structured and detailed approach to crypto asset classification.

Although the document is a staff-level interpretation rather than a binding rule, it provides clearer guidance for stakeholders navigating staking models under US law.

What liquid staking is and how it works

Liquid staking is already widely used across major proof-of-stake networks. These systems issue receipt tokens that represent a user’s staked assets and reflect accumulated rewards over time. 

Unlike standard staking, which typically locks assets for a fixed duration with withdrawal delays, liquid staking offers flexibility — users can trade these tokens, hold them in wallets, or use them in DeFi protocols without needing to unstake the original assets.

Once deposited, the platform takes over the technical responsibilities. It assigns the stake to a validator, monitors uptime and penalties, and adjusts balances to account for rewards or slashing. 

Users are not involved in validator selection or operational decisions; their role ends after the initial deposit.

Depending on the setup, custody is handled either by smart contracts or centralized entities like Coinbase Custody. 

Regardless of who holds the asset, receipt tokens typically follow one of two models: some increase in redemption value over time to reflect rewards, while others maintain a fixed ratio but issue additional tokens as returns accrue. 

In both cases, the tokens are redeemable for the original stake plus yield, with platforms specifying cooldown periods, redemption terms, and any applicable fees.

These tokens act as a bridge between staking and liquidity. They let users continue earning network rewards while using the tokens across lending protocols, exchanges, and other on-chain tools. 

Importantly, the process does not involve pooled fund management or promised profits. Control over the underlying crypto remains with the user, and all returns are generated by the protocol itself, not by any third-party intermediary.

Lido, Rocket Pool, and what qualifies

The SEC’s statement has direct implications for liquid staking protocols such as Lido (LIDO) and Rocket Pool (RPL), both of which issue receipt tokens representing ownership of staked Ethereum (ETH). 

Tokens like Lido Staked ETH (stETH) and Rocket Pool ETH (rETH) are minted one-to-one with user deposits and accrue protocol-generated rewards, without the provider exercising discretion over user returns.

Lido relies on automated smart contracts to manage staking and token issuance. Once assets are deposited, the process unfolds without manual intervention. 

Rocket Pool operates a permissionless network of node operators, making the entire staking and token-minting process programmatic and non-custodial.

In both models, the platforms do not decide how much to stake, when to stake, or which validators to use. Users retain ownership of their staked ETH while using receipt tokens freely across DeFi platforms like Aave (AAVE) and Curve DAO (CRV).

The SEC’s interpretation affirms that, as long as providers avoid performing managerial or entrepreneurial functions, such activities do not constitute investment contracts under the Howey test. 

This effectively gives compliant protocols a path to operate without SEC registration, assuming they remain within the outlined parameters.

The guidance also reduces regulatory uncertainty for developers building on top of these tokens, provided their mechanics remain consistent. 

However, the interpretation does not apply to centralized providers who layer additional discretion or marketing into their staking services. 

For example, Coinbase charges a fixed fee and offers reward projections, potentially blurring the line between protocol-driven returns and provider-managed products.

ETH price and market impact

The SEC’s interpretation could strengthen Ethereum’s long-term utility and market confidence by removing ambiguity around the legal status of liquid staking. 

As of Aug. 6, ETH is trading at $3,615, down 4.5% over the past week amid broader market corrections, but still up nearly 40% over the past month, driven by staking demand, ETF inflows, and expanding infrastructure across Ethereum’s layer-2 ecosystem.

SEC clarity on liquid staking strengthens Ethereum’s investment case - 1

Liquid staking now accounts for over 30% of total ETH staked, with protocols like Lido and Rocket Pool leading adoption. The ability to earn rewards while retaining liquidity has made these systems central to Ethereum’s value proposition.

With legal clarity, institutions may grow more comfortable allocating capital to liquid staking protocols, boosting overall staking participation, which translates into greater demand for ETH and reinforces its role as a productive, yield-generating asset.

The guidance also removes friction around using staking tokens as collateral in DeFi, which is vital to Ethereum’s liquidity layer. 

While near-term prices remain subject to market forces, clearer rules create a more stable regulatory foundation, supporting ETH’s broader adoption and utility.

Market Opportunity
Notcoin Logo
Notcoin Price(NOT)
$0.0006392
$0.0006392$0.0006392
+2.64%
USD
Notcoin (NOT) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact service@support.mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

Franklin Templeton CEO Dismisses 50bps Rate Cut Ahead FOMC

Franklin Templeton CEO Dismisses 50bps Rate Cut Ahead FOMC

The post Franklin Templeton CEO Dismisses 50bps Rate Cut Ahead FOMC appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Franklin Templeton CEO Jenny Johnson has weighed in on whether the Federal Reserve should make a 25 basis points (bps) Fed rate cut or 50 bps cut. This comes ahead of the Fed decision today at today’s FOMC meeting, with the market pricing in a 25 bps cut. Bitcoin and the broader crypto market are currently trading flat ahead of the rate cut decision. Franklin Templeton CEO Weighs In On Potential FOMC Decision In a CNBC interview, Jenny Johnson said that she expects the Fed to make a 25 bps cut today instead of a 50 bps cut. She acknowledged the jobs data, which suggested that the labor market is weakening. However, she noted that this data is backward-looking, indicating that it doesn’t show the current state of the economy. She alluded to the wage growth, which she remarked is an indication of a robust labor market. She added that retail sales are up and that consumers are still spending, despite inflation being sticky at 3%, which makes a case for why the FOMC should opt against a 50-basis-point Fed rate cut. In line with this, the Franklin Templeton CEO said that she would go with a 25 bps rate cut if she were Jerome Powell. She remarked that the Fed still has the October and December FOMC meetings to make further cuts if the incoming data warrants it. Johnson also asserted that the data show a robust economy. However, she noted that there can’t be an argument for no Fed rate cut since Powell already signaled at Jackson Hole that they were likely to lower interest rates at this meeting due to concerns over a weakening labor market. Notably, her comment comes as experts argue for both sides on why the Fed should make a 25 bps cut or…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:36
WIF price reclaims 200-day moving average

WIF price reclaims 200-day moving average

WIF (WIF) price is entering a critical technical phase as price action reclaims the 200-day moving average, a level that often separates bearish control from bullish
Share
Crypto.news2026/01/13 23:44
China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise

China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise

The post China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. China Blocks Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D as Local Chips Rise China’s internet regulator has ordered the country’s biggest technology firms, including Alibaba and ByteDance, to stop purchasing Nvidia’s RTX Pro 6000D GPUs. According to the Financial Times, the move shuts down the last major channel for mass supplies of American chips to the Chinese market. Why Beijing Halted Nvidia Purchases Chinese companies had planned to buy tens of thousands of RTX Pro 6000D accelerators and had already begun testing them in servers. But regulators intervened, halting the purchases and signaling stricter controls than earlier measures placed on Nvidia’s H20 chip. Image: Nvidia An audit compared Huawei and Cambricon processors, along with chips developed by Alibaba and Baidu, against Nvidia’s export-approved products. Regulators concluded that Chinese chips had reached performance levels comparable to the restricted U.S. models. This assessment pushed authorities to advise firms to rely more heavily on domestic processors, further tightening Nvidia’s already limited position in China. China’s Drive Toward Tech Independence The decision highlights Beijing’s focus on import substitution — developing self-sufficient chip production to reduce reliance on U.S. supplies. “The signal is now clear: all attention is focused on building a domestic ecosystem,” said a representative of a leading Chinese tech company. Nvidia had unveiled the RTX Pro 6000D in July 2025 during CEO Jensen Huang’s visit to Beijing, in an attempt to keep a foothold in China after Washington restricted exports of its most advanced chips. But momentum is shifting. Industry sources told the Financial Times that Chinese manufacturers plan to triple AI chip production next year to meet growing demand. They believe “domestic supply will now be sufficient without Nvidia.” What It Means for the Future With Huawei, Cambricon, Alibaba, and Baidu stepping up, China is positioning itself for long-term technological independence. Nvidia, meanwhile, faces…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 01:37