On August 18, 2026, the SEC took its most historic step toward modernizing digital market rules by proposing Regulation Crypto Assets. This landmark proposal establishes a purpose-built federal pathway for token fundraising transactions and a conditional exit from investment contract status. By shifting from a policy of regulation by enforcement to a codified set of exemptions and safe harbors, the SEC has provided clear parameters that public company boards, founders, and advisers need to structure compliant offerings.
The proposed new rules, titled “Regulation Crypto Assets” : (i) establishes a startup registration exemption for certain offers, sales, and other distributions of covered investment contracts during a period of up to four years permitting offerings up to $5 million over that rolling four-year period; (ii) creates a registration exemption that would permit up to $75 million during each 12 month period, modeled in large part after Regulation A, including with a two tier system; (iii) creates a safe harbor from the term “investment contract” in the definition of a “security”; and (iv) defines “qualified purchaser” such that the state law preemption provisions of Section 18 of the Securities Act would apply to the offers and sales under Regulation Crypto Assets as well as certain secondary markets transactions.
Chairman Paul S. Atkins framed the new rulebook as a vital mechanism to onshore innovation and revitalize capital formation in the United States. Rather than subjecting digital tokens to outdated S-1 registration requirements, the SEC has proposed a principles-based regime that separates the underlying blockchain asset from the investment contract wrapped around its distribution. This long-awaited change establishes a legal runway for issuers while protecting retail participants through strict limits on individual investments.
This Part 1 detailed background including the March, 2025 joint SEC and CFTC guidance on crypto asset classifications. Part 1 also sets for the high level registration exemptions of Regulation Crypto – see HERE. Part 2 of the series drills down into the operational aspects of the new exemptions including integration matters, secondary market trading, and state law pre-emption.
Disclosure Requirements
Although under Rule 103 of Regulation Cyrpto Assets disclosure is specifically to be principal based, the rule also sets forth certain disclosure requirements for both the start-up and fundraising exemptions. Information provided under Regulation Crypto Assets should be tailored to the issuer, the subject crypto asset, and the associated crypto network or associated crypto application and should be presented in clear, concise, and understandable language, without overly relying on technical terminology or jargon. Information provided would also be required to address the current stage of development of the issuer, the subject crypto asset, and the associated crypto network or associated crypto application and should clearly delineate any forward-looking or future plans of development.
Specifically, disclosures are proposed to be organized into the following topics: (i) covered investment contract; (ii) offering; (iii) subject crypto asset; (iv) management, related persons, and conflicts of interest; (v) associated crypto network/application; plan of development; (vi) security; source code; (vii) subject crypto asset economics and allocation; (viii) governance; (ix) subject crypto asset ecosystem; and (x) risk factors.
The Investment Contract Safe Harbor: A Defined Exit from SEC Jurisdiction
The most legally significant and innovative element of proposed Regulation Crypto Assets is the conditional safe harbor that allows a token to stop being treated as a security. For nearly a decade, token issuers have struggled under the rigid expectation that a digital asset maintains its initial classification forever, creating a permanent cloud of regulatory uncertainty over secondary market transactions. The new safe harbor provides a clear, objective pathway to exit the federal securities regime.
Under Rule 150, an issuer may transition its token out of the investment-contract definition once it has completed or permanently ceased all “essential managerial efforts” promised to investors. This occurs when the underlying blockchain network has achieved sufficient decentralization or the founding team has fulfilled its development promises. To enter this safe harbor, the issuer must file a Form TR on the EDGAR system. The Form TR must include a detailed certification and supporting analysis demonstrating that the network is self-sustaining and that investors no longer rely on the managerial efforts of the founding group for the asset’s value.
The distinction between essential managerial efforts and post-launch maintenance is critical. Under the 2026 Interpretive Release, detailed representations about development milestones, funding, and timelines constitute essential managerial efforts. Conversely, post-launch maintenance, security patches, or routine network enhancements do not. Once the Form TR is qualified by the Commission, the token is deemed no longer subject to an investment contract under either the Securities Act or the Exchange Act. This transition effectively exits the token from SEC jurisdiction, allowing it to trade freely on secondary platforms as a digital commodity or utility tool.
Crucially, the proposal also provides state-level Blue Sky preemption for both the primary offerings and subsequent secondary transactions. This preemption eliminates the expensive, state-by-state registration hurdles that have historically fragmented the U.S. digital asset market. It is important to note that this bespoke framework applies strictly to “covered investment contracts” involving crypto assets. Tokenized versions of conventional equity stock or corporate debt remain fully subject to traditional securities rules. Furthermore, payment stablecoins defined under the GENIUS Act are specifically excluded, as they are subject to their own specialized federal regime.
Integration
Regulation Crypto Assets defers to the general integration standards found in Rule 152. For a review of the Rule 152 safe harbor provisions see HERE. The proposed new rule would also modify Rule 152 to clarify when an offering under an exemption in Regulation Crypto Assets has been deemed to have commenced and when it has been deemed to have been terminated or completed.
Harmonizing Token Offerings with Traditional Exemptions: Stacking Reg D and Reg S
Regulation Crypto Assets is a non-exclusive safe harbor. Traditional private placements under Rules 506(b) and (c) of Regulation D, alongside offshore distributions under the S framework, remain highly valuable for primary fundraising. However, traditional exemptions carry a significant regulatory cost: the resulting securities are “restricted” under Rule 144, imposing a mandatory one-year lockup that prevents liquid secondary markets. Additionally, Regulation D does not preempt state-level Blue Sky registration for secondary trading, leaving market participants to navigate a complex, state-by-state patchwork of rules. In contrast, proposed Regulation Crypto Assets establishes a “qualified purchaser” definition under Section 18(b)(3) of the Securities Act. This definition preempts state-level registration for both primary offerings and subsequent secondary trades. Because tokens issued under the new exemptions are not restricted securities, they can be freely transferred immediately, facilitating crucial network effects. This allows corporate boards to stack these exemptions: an issuer can initiate development using the $5 million startup safe harbor, subsequently transition to a Tier 2 fundraising offering on Form 1-CRYPTO, and eventually exit securities status entirely once essential managerial efforts have ceased. Alternatively, an issuer can utilize private placements under Regulation D for institutional funding rounds, while deploying the proposed crypto framework to distribute unrestricted utility tokens directly to network participants.
Blue Sky Preemption and Secondary Market Infrastructure
For trading platforms and broker-dealers, proposed Regulation Crypto Assets introduces a powerful mechanism for secondary market liquidity. Under proposed Section 18(b)(3) of the 1933 Act, the Commission defines these agreements as “covered securities” for “qualified purchasers.” This definition effectively preempts state-level registration and qualification requirements for both the primary offerings and subsequent secondary transactions. This federal preemption represents a milestone, dismantling the complex regional patchwork of Blue Sky filings that has historically fragmented digital asset distributions.
Furthermore, the proposal optimizes market structure by encouraging Alternative Trading Systems (ATS) to facilitate secondary exchange of both securities and non-traditional assets, creating unified liquidity pools. By housing digital commodities and tokenized investment contracts within a single execution venue, an ATS can achieve professional-grade market efficiency. However, it is critical to recognize what the current proposal does not do. The SEC expressly notes that this release does not resolve whether secondary platforms must register as broker-dealers, alternative trading venues, or national exchanges under the Exchange Act. Instead, the Commission has deferred those broker-dealer and exchange registration questions to separate rulemakings on its 2026 agenda. Additionally, the framework does not alter any rules under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940, meaning custody and marketing compliance remains unchanged for registered firms.
Operational Hazards: Gun-Jumping Risks, Bad Actor Rules, and UCC Article 8
For C-suite executives and project developers, proposed Regulation Crypto Assets introduces severe operational hazards that demand early, meticulous planning. First, the gun-jumping risks under the startup exemption are acute. Because the exemption only shields transactions occurring after filing Form NOR on EDGAR, any public marketing or pre-filing communications can blow the safe harbor. A premature tweet or presentation discussing token utility can be deemed a non-exempt offer, subjecting the entire campaign to rescission liability.
Second, proposed Rule 104 bad actor provisions incorporate the disqualification standards of Regulation A’s Rule 262. While past conduct predating the rule’s effective date does not automatically bar an issuer, the team must disclose all such events in writing to each purchaser prior to sale. Failing to handle this diligence cleanly represents a potential trap for the unwary. For more on the bad actor rules see HERE.
Finally, token issuers must align their technological designs with state-level corporate governance and Article 8 of the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC). Even with federal Blue Sky preemption, on-chain ledger records must be legally binding under local state codes to ensure valid ownership transfers.
Relationship Partner Advisory: Navigating the New Lifecycle Regulation
As the primary relationship partner advising public company boards and digital asset innovators, I believe the proposed Regulation Crypto Assets framework provides a profound structural opportunity. By transitioning from an enforcement-driven model to a lifecycle regulatory path, the SEC is offering a clear map from early fundraising to complete securities status exit. To capture this opportunity cleanly, compliantly, and efficiently, corporate leadership must execute four strategic mandates.
First, institute absolute pre-filing communication controls to prevent gun-jumping violations. Before filing Form NOR, all public presentations, whitepapers, or social media statements must be strictly monitored by legal counsel.
Second, conduct thorough background diligence on your development team to identify any potential bad-actor events that would trigger Rule 104 written disclosure requirements.
Third, verify that your underlying distributed ledger architecture complies with UCC Article 8 and state-level corporate registries to ensure valid, binding title transfers.
Finally, actively engage with the SEC during the 60-day public comment window to shape provisions that directly impact your product offerings. We urge clients to work closely with our firm to draft tailored submissions that protect their strategic interests. These proactive steps build directly upon the foundational digital asset disclosure principles first explored in my June 17, 2025, blog (available HERE), establishing a compliant path for modern capital markets.
The Author
Laura Anthony, Esq.
Founding Partner
Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis
A Corporate and Securities Law Firm
Seurities attorney Laura Anthony and her experienced legal team provide ongoing corporate counsel to small and mid-size private companies, public companies as well as private companies going public on the Nasdaq, NYSE American or over-the-counter market, such as the OTCQB and OTCQX. For more than two decades Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLC has served clients providing fast, personalized, cutting-edge legal service. The firm’s reputation and relationships provide invaluable resources to clients including introductions to investment bankers, broker-dealers, institutional investors and other strategic alliances. The firm’s focus includes, but is not limited to, compliance with the Securities Act of 1933 offer sale and registration requirements, including private placement transactions under Regulation D and Regulation S and PIPE Transactions, securities token offerings and initial coin offerings, Regulation A/A+ offerings, as well as registration statements on Forms S-1, S-3, S-8 and merger registrations on Form S-4; compliance with the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, including registration on Form 10, reporting on Forms 10-Q, 10-K and 8-K, and 14C Information and 14A Proxy Statements; all forms of going public transactions; mergers and acquisitions including both reverse mergers and forward mergers; applications to and compliance with the corporate governance requirements of securities exchanges including Nasdaq and NYSE American; general corporate; and general contract and business transactions. Ms. Anthony and her firm represent both target and acquiring companies in merger and acquisition transactions, including the preparation of transaction documents such as merger agreements, share exchange agreements, stock purchase agreements, asset purchase agreements and reorganization agreements. The ALC legal team assists Pubcos in complying with the requirements of federal and state securities laws and SROs such as FINRA for 15c2-11 applications, corporate name changes, reverse and forward splits and changes of domicile. Ms. Anthony is also the author of SecuritiesLawBlog.com, the small-cap and middle market’s top source for industry news, and the producer and host of LawCast.com, Corporate Finance in Focus. In addition to many other major metropolitan areas, the firm currently represents clients in New York, Los Angeles, Miami, Boca Raton, West Palm Beach, Atlanta, Phoenix, Scottsdale, Charlotte, Cincinnati, Cleveland, Washington, D.C., Denver, Tampa, Detroit and Dallas.
Ms. Anthony is a member of various professional organizations including the Crowdfunding Professional Association (CfPA), Palm Beach County Bar Association, the Florida Bar Association, the American Bar Association and the ABA committees on Federal Securities Regulations and Private Equity and Venture Capital. She is a supporter of several community charities including the American Red Cross for Palm Beach and Martin Counties, Susan Komen Foundation, Opportunity, Inc., New Hope Charities, the Society of the Four Arts, the Norton Museum of Art, Palm Beach County Zoo Society, the Kravis Center for the Performing Arts and several others.
Ms. Anthony is an honors graduate from Florida State University College of Law and has been practicing law since 1993.
Contact Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLC. Inquiries of a technical nature are always encouraged.
Follow Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLC on Facebook, LinkedIn, YouTube, Pinterest and Twitter.
Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLC makes this general information available for educational purposes only. The information is general in nature and does not constitute legal advice. Furthermore, the use of this information, and the sending or receipt of this information, does not create or constitute an attorney-client relationship between us. Therefore, your communication with us via this information in any form will not be considered as privileged or confidential.
© Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLC
