ナスダック、デジタル資産の取引を可能にする規則改正案を提出

2025年9月8日、ナスダックは一連の規則改正案の最新として、トークン化証券を含むデジタル資産の取引を可能にするための規則改正を提案しました。今回の改正案の目的は、ブローカーおよび投資家が取引所でトークンを取引できることを明確に定めることにあります。この改正を実現するため、ナスダックは以下の変更を提案しています。(i) ブロックチェーンを基盤とする株式(トークン化証券を含む)を「有価証券」の定義に追加すること、(ii) トークン化証券を注文入力およびルーティング手続きに組み込むこと、(iii) トークン化証券の清算および決済の優先順位を従来の証券と同等に整合させるため、ブック処理を更新すること。

背景

米国の株式市場はこれまで、紙の証券から電子証券への移行、決済サイクルの短縮、価格情報の即時配信、アルゴリズムによる電子取引の導入など、技術革新を支える形で発展してきました。ブロックチェーンを利用したデジタル台帳技術により証券取引を記録する「トークン化」も、こうした技術革新の一つです。ナスダックは、トークン化証券の利用が規制市場、すなわち国の証券取引所や代替取引システム(ATS)上で、FINRA によって規制されたブローカーディーラー、DTC、既存の清算機関を通じて行われる限り、現行の規制枠組みは従来の証券と同様に適用されると考えています。つまり、トークン化証券のために特別な例外措置や並行した市場構造を新たに設ける必要はない、という立場です。

ナスダックは、国家市場システムが提供しているメリットや投資家保護を維持しながら、市場がトークン化を活用できると考えています。さらに今回の規則改正は、投資家および米国の取引システムを保護するために必要であるとしています。とりわけ、現行の市場構造のもとでトークン化証券の取引を認めることで、米国株式のトークン化取引を可能にすると主張しながら、実際には各プラットフォームが自ら購入・保有する証券に対するデジタル上の取引権利しか提供していない“小規模な二次的市場”が拡大・継続することを防ぐことができると述べています。

さらにナスダックは、トークン化証券の取引を受け入れるために必要なのは既存の規則や慣行に対するごく小規模な変更のみであり、広範な例外措置を認めるべきではないと主張しています。

提案されている規則改正

上記の通り、改正を実施するために、ナスダックは以下の変更を提案しています。(i) ブロックチェーンを基盤とする株式(トークン化証券を含む)を「有価証券」の定義に追加すること、(ii) 注文入力およびルーティング手続きをトークン化証券にも対応させること、(iii) トークン化証券の清算・決済の優先順位を従来の証券と同等に整合させるため、ブック処理を更新すること。

注文入力と処理

ナスダックは、有価証券の定義を改正し、取引所参加者がトークン化証券を取引できるようにすることを提案しています。本改正では、「トークン化」とは、デジタル台帳やブロックチェーン技術を利用した紙の証券のデジタル表現を指すことを明確にし、ブロックチェーンを利用しない「従来型」のデジタル証券とは区別されます。さらに定義では、トークン化証券は従来の同等クラスの証券と同一の CUSIP 番号を持ち、同等の権利・利益を有すること、かつ相互に代替可能(ファンジブル)であることが求められるとしています。ナスダックでは、トークン化証券と従来型証券を同一の注文帳で取り扱い、同じ執行優先ルールに従って取引されます。

トークン化株式証券は、従来型証券と同等の権利・利益を提供するものとみなされます。具体的には、基礎となる会社に対する株式持分を有すること、会社が株主に支払う配当を受け取る権利を有すること、株主としての議決権を行使する権利を有すること、会社清算時に残余資産の分配を受ける権利を有すること、などが含まれます。

さらに、ナスダックは注文入力規則の改正も提案しており、トークン化された形式で証券を清算・決済する意思を伝える方法を定めることとしています。ナスダックは、トークン化形式での取引希望を示すための選択可能なフラグを作成します。その後、DTC は参加者の指示に従い、DTC の規則、方針、手続きに基づいて処理を行います。

同様に、ナスダックはブック処理規則も改正し、注文にトークン化証券が含まれている、またはトークン形式での清算・決済を希望していることだけでは、その注文の取引所での執行優先順位に影響を与えないことを明確にします。

さらに、ナスダックは注文ルーティング規則も改正し、清算・決済をトークン形式で行う指定がある注文を他の取引所にルーティングした場合、注文の執行が発生した際にそのトークン化指示を DTC に伝達することを明記します。

これらの変更を除けば、ナスダックのシステムおよびマッチングエンジンに関しては、会員が株式をトークン化株式として取引するか従来型株式として取引するかにかかわらず、取引手続きや挙動は同一となります。

トークン化と取引後処理

ナスダックの提案する規則改正は、必要なインフラおよび取引後の決済サービスが DTC により整備され、かつ必要な規制当局の承認が得られた時点で発効する予定です。ナスダックによると、DTC はこのトークン化および関連する取引後決済のインフラやサービス、手続きを整備するための作業を進めているとのことです。

著者

ローラ・アンソニー弁護士

設立パートナー

アンソニー、リンダー&カコマノリス

企業法務および証券法務事務所

LAnthony@ALClaw.com

証券弁護士ローラ・アンソニー氏とその経験豊富な法律チームは、中小規模の非公開企業、上場企業、そして上場予定の非公開企業に対して継続的な企業顧問サービスを提供しています。ナスダックNYSEアメリカン、または店頭市場(例えばOTCQBOTCQX)で上場を目指す企業も対象です。20年以上にわたり、Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLC(ALC)は、迅速でパーソナライズされた最先端の法的サービスをクライアントに提供してきました。当事務所の評判と人脈は、投資銀行、証券会社、機関投資家、その他の戦略的提携先への紹介など、クライアントにとって非常に貴重なリソースとなっています。当事務所の専門分野には、1933年証券法の募集・販売および登録要件の遵守(レギュレーションDおよびレギュレーションSに基づく私募取引、PIPE取引、証券トークン・オファリング、イニシャル・コイン・オファリングを含む)が含まれますが、これに限定されません。規制A/A+オファリング、S-1、S-3、S-8フォームの登録申請、S-4フォームによる合併登録、1934年証券取引法の遵守(フォーム10による登録、フォーム10-Q、10-K、8-Kおよび14C情報・14A委任状報告書)、あらゆる形態の株式公開取引、合併・買収(リバースマージャーおよびフォワードマージャーを含む)、ナスダックやNYSEアメリカンを含む証券取引所のコーポレートガバナンス要件への申請および遵守、一般企業取引、一般契約および事業取引が含まれます。アンソニー氏と当事務所は、合併・買収取引において、買収対象企業と買収企業の双方を代理し、合併契約、株式交換契約、株式購入契約、資産購入契約、組織再編契約などの取引文書を作成します。ALC法務チームは、公開企業が連邦および州の証券法やSROs要件に準拠することを支援しており、15c2-11申請、社名変更、リバース・フォワードスプリット、本拠地変更などにも対応しています。アンソニー氏はまた、中堅・中小企業向けの業界ニュースのトップ情報源であるSecuritiesLawBlog.comの著者であり、企業財務に特化したポッドキャスト『LawCast.com: Corporate Finance in Focus』のプロデューサー兼ホストでもあります。当事務所は、ニューヨーク、ロサンゼルス、マイアミ、ボカラトン、ウェストパームビーチ、アトランタ、フェニックス、スコッツデール、シャーロット、シンシナティ、クリーブランド、ワシントンD.C.、デンバー、タンパ、デトロイト、ダラスなど、多くの主要都市でクライアントを代理しています。

アンソニー氏は、Crowdfunding Professional Association(CfPA)、パームビーチ郡弁護士会、フロリダ州弁護士会、アメリカ弁護士会(ABA)および連邦証券規制やプライベート・エクイティ・ベンチャーキャピタルに関するABA委員会など、さまざまな専門団体のメンバーです。パームビーチ郡およびマーティン郡のアメリカ赤十字社、スーザン・コーメン財団、オポチュニティ社(Opportunity, Inc.)、ニュー・ホープ・チャリティーズ、フォー・アーツ協会(Society of the Four Arts)、ノートン美術館、パームビーチ郡動物園協会、クラヴィス・パフォーミング・アーツ・センターなど、複数の地域社会慈善団体を支援しています。

アンソニー氏はフロリダ州立大学ロースクールを優秀な成績で卒業しており、1993年から弁護士として活動しています。

Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLC にお問い合わせください。技術的な内容に関するご質問もいつでも歓迎いたします。

Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLCFacebookLinkedInYouTubePinterestTwitter でフォローしてください。

Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLCは、本情報を教育目的の一般情報として提供しています。本情報は一般的な内容であり、法的助言を構成するものではありません。さらに、本情報の利用や送受信は、当事務所との弁護士–依頼者関係を成立させるものではありません。したがって、本情報を通じて当事務所と行ういかなる通信も、特権または機密として扱われることはありません。

© Anthony, Linder & Cacomanolis, PLLC

 

 

NASDAQ Proposes Amendments To Allow For The Trading Of Digital Assets

On September 8, 2025, in the newest in a series of proposed rule amendments, Nasdaq has proposed amendments to enable the trading of digital assets, including tokenized securities.  The purpose of the rule change is to clearly establish that brokers and investors can trade tokens on the Exchange.  To effectuate the amendment, Nasdaq is proposing to (i) add blockchain backed equities, including tokenized securities, to the definition of a “security,” (ii) update order entry and routing procedures to include tokenized securities; and (iii) update book processing to align tokenized securities with the same clearance and settlement priority as traditional securities.

Background

Over the years, U.S. equity markets have transformed to support technological innovations including, for example, moving from paper to electronic securities, shortening settlement cycles, instant price dissemination, and allowing for algorithmic electronic trading.  Tokenization, which involves recording securities transactions using digital ledger blockchain technology, is such an innovation.  Nasdaq believes that as long as the use of

SEC Withdraws Statement On Broker Dealer Custody Of Digital Asset Securities

On May 15, 2025, the SEC Division of Trading and Markets and Office and FINRA’s Office of General Counsel withdrew their joint statement on broker dealer custody of digital asset securities.  The original joint statement had been issued on July 8, 2019 (see HERE).  This original statement has oft been thought of as the reason that broker dealers have not (could not) adopt any broad ranging policies or procedures related to digital assets.

The withdrawal of the joint statement, together with the slew of other recent activity from the SEC related to digital assets, (see HERE for example) is an important step towards more widespread adoption of digital asset trading, allowing retail investors to aggregate their investments with their trusted broker dealer advisors.

Refresher On Original Joint Statement/Concerns

Broker-dealers that hold funds and securities must comply with Exchange Act Rule 15c3-3 (the “Customer Protection Rule”), which generally requires the broker to maintain physical possession or control over

An IPO Without The SEC

On January 23, 2019, biotechnology company Gossamer Bio, Inc., filed an amended S-1 pricing its $230 million initial public offering, taking advantage of a rarely used SEC Rule that will allow the S-1 to go effective, and the IPO to be completed, 20 days from filing, without action by the SEC.  Since the government shutdown, several companies have opted to proceed with the effectiveness of a registration statement for a follow-on offering without SEC review or approval, but this marks the first full IPO, and certainly the first of any significant size. The Gossamer IPO is being underwritten by Bank of America Merrill Lynch, SVB Leerink, Barclays and Evercore ISI. On January 24, 2019, Nasdaq issued five FAQ addressing their position on listing companies utilizing Section 8(a).  Although the SEC has recommenced full operations as of today, there has non-the-less been a transformation in the methods used to access capital markets, and the use of 8(a) is just

SEC Chair Jay Clayton Discusses Direction Of SEC

In a much talked about speech to the Economic Club of New York on July 12, 2017, SEC Chairman Jay Clayton set forth his thoughts on SEC policy, including a list of guiding principles for his tenure. Chair Clayton’s underlying theme is the furtherance of opportunities and protection of Main Street investors, a welcome viewpoint from the securities markets’ top regulator. This was Chair Clayton’s first public speech in his new role and follows Commissioner Michael Piwowar’s recent remarks to the SEC-NYU Dialogue on Securities Market Regulation largely related to the U.S. IPO market. For a summary of Commissioner Piwowar’s speech, read HERE.

Guiding Principles

Chair Clayton outlined a list of eight guiding principles for the SEC.

#1: The SEC’s Mission is its touchstone

As described by Chair Clayton, the SEC has a three part mission: (i) to protect investors; (ii) to maintain fair, orderly and efficient markets, and (iii) to facilitate capital formation. Chair Clayton stresses that it

SEC Adopts The T+2 Trade Settlement Cycle

Introduction and brief summary of the rule

On March 22, 2017, the SEC adopted a rule amendment shortening the standard settlement cycle for broker-initiated trade settlements from three business days from the trade date (T+3) to two business days (T+2). The change is designed to help enhance efficiency and reduce risks, including credit, market and liquidity risks, associated with unsettled transactions in the marketplace.

Acting SEC Chair Michael Piwowar stated, “[A]s technology improves, new products emerge, and trading volumes grow, it is increasingly obvious that the outdated T+3 settlement cycle is no longer serving the best interests of the American people.” The SEC originally proposed the rule amendment on September 28, 2016. My blog on the proposal can be read HERE. In addition, for more information on the clearance and settlement process for U.S. capital markets, see HERE.

The change amends Rule 15c6-1(a) prohibiting a broker-dealer from effecting or entering into a contract for the purchase or sale

SEC Proposes Shortening Trade Settlement

On September 28, 2016, the SEC proposed a rule amendment to shorten the standard broker-initiated trade settlement cycle from three business days from the trade date (T+3) to two business days (T+2). The change is designed to help reduce risks, including credit, market and liquidity risks, associated with unsettled transactions in the marketplace. Outgoing SEC Chair, Mary Jo White was quoted as saying that the change “is an important step to the SEC’s ongoing efforts to enhance the resiliency and efficiency of the U.S. clearance and settlement system.” I have previously written about the clearance and settlement process for U.S. capital markets, which can be reviewed HERE.

Background

DTC provides the depository and book entry settlement services for substantially all equity trading in the US.  Over $600 billion in transactions are completed at DTC each day. Although all similar, the exact clearance and settlement process depends on the type of security being traded (stock, bond, etc.), the form the

DTC Again Proposes Procedures For Issuers Subject To Chills And Locks

On June 3, 2016, the DTC filed a new set of proposed rules to specify procedures available to issuers when the DTC imposes or intends to impose chills or locks. The issue of persistent and increasing chills and global locks which once dominated many discussions related to the small- and micro-cap space has dwindled in the last year or two. The new proposed rule release explains the change in DTC procedures and mindset related to its function in combating the deposit and trading of ineligible securities.

Background

On October 8, 2013, I published a blog and white paper providing background and information on the Depository Trust Company (“DTC”) eligibility, chills and locks and the DTC’s then plans to propose new rules to specify procedures available to issuers when the DTC imposes or intends to impose chills or locks (see my blog HERE). On December 5, 2013, the DTC filed these proposed rules with the SEC and on December 18,

The U.S. Capital Markets Clearance And Settlement Process

Within the world of securities there are many sectors and facets to explore and understand.  To be successful, a public company must have an active, liquid trading market.  Accordingly, the trading markets themselves, including the settlement and clearing process in the US markets, is an important fundamental area of knowledge that every public company, potential public company, and advisor needs to comprehend.  A basic understanding of the trading markets will help drive relationships with transfer agents, market makers, broker-dealers and financial public relations firms as well as provide the knowledge to improve relationships with shareholders.  In addition, small pooled funds such as venture and hedge funds and family offices that invest in public markets will benefit from an understanding of the process.

This blog provides a historical foundation and summary of the clearance and settlement processes for US equities markets.  In a future blog, I will drill down into specific trading, including short selling.

History and Background

The Paperwork Crisis

Going Public Transactions For Smaller Companies: Direct Public Offering And Reverse Merger

Introduction

One of the largest areas of my firms practice involves going public transactions.  I have written extensively on the various going public methods, including IPO/DPOs and reverse mergers.  The topic never loses relevancy, and those considering a transaction always ask about the differences between, and advantages and disadvantages of, both reverse mergers and direct and initial public offerings.  This blog is an updated new edition of past articles on the topic.

Over the past decade the small-cap reverse merger, initial public offering (IPO) and direct public offering (DPO) markets diminished greatly.  The decline was a result of both regulatory changes and economic changes.  In particular, briefly, those reasons were:  (1) the recent Great Recession; (2) backlash from a series of fraud allegations, SEC enforcement actions, and trading suspensions of Chinese companies following reverse mergers; (3) the 2008 Rule 144 amendments, including the prohibition of use of the rule for shell company and former shell company shareholders; (4) problems

SEC Suspends Trading On 128 OTC Markets Companies

On March 2, 2015, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) suspended the trading in 128 dormant shell companies trading on the OTC Link.  The SEC suspended the trading in these shell companies because of questions regarding the accuracy and adequacy of publicly disseminated information concerning the companies’ operating status, if any.

The SEC notes in its release that OTC Markets had been unable to contact each of the issuers for more than one year.  None of the subject issuers had filed any information or updated with either OTC Markets or the SEC in over a year.   The SEC staff then independently attempted to contact the issuers and was able to contact 10 of the 128 companies and confirm from those ten that they had either ceased operations or gone private.

The trading suspensions are part of an SEC initiative tabbed Operation Shell-Expel by the SEC’s Microcap Fraud Working Group.  As part of the initiative, the SEC Enforcement Division’s Office of

What is A CUSIP and Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) Number?

CUSIP stands for Committee on Uniform Securities Identification Procedures.  A CUSIP number identifies securities, specifically U.S. and Canadian registered stocks, and U.S. government and municipal bonds.  The CUSIP system—owned by the American Bankers Association and operated by Standard & Poor’s—facilitates the clearing and settlement process of securities by giving each such security a unique identifying number.

The CUSIP number consists of a combination of nine characters, both letters and numbers, which act as individual coding for the security—uniquely identifying the company or issuer and the type of security. The first six characters identify the issuer and are alphabetical; the seventh and eighth characters, which can be alphabetical or numerical, identify the type of issue; and the last digit is used as a check digit.  A CUSIP number changes with each change in the security, including splits and name changes.

Whereas CUSIP identifies securities, a Legal Entity Identifier (LEI) identifies issuers.  An LEI is a new global standard identifier for

SEC Suspends Trading On 61 Shell Companies

The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) today suspended the trading in 61 dormant shell companies.  The trading suspensions are part of an SEC initiative tabbed Operation Shell-Expel by the SEC’s Microcap Fraud Working Group.  In May 2012, the SEC suspended the trading on 379 shell companies as part of the initiative.  Each of the companies were dormant shells that were not current in public disclosures.  Each of the companies failed to have adequate current public information available either through the news service on OTC Markets or filed with the SEC via EDGAR.

The federal securities laws allow the SEC to suspend trading in any stock for up to 10 business days. Once a company is suspended from trading, it cannot be quoted again until it provides updated information including complete disclosure of its business and accurate financial statements.  In addition to providing the necessary information, to begin to trade again, a company must enlist a market maker to file a

An Update On Dealing With The DTC Following The SEC’s Ruling On International Power Group, Ltd.

Background

Back in October and November of 2011, I wrote a series of blogs regarding DTC eligibility for OTC (over-the-counter) Issuers.  OTC Issuers include all companies, whose securities trade on the over-the-counter market, including the OTCBB, OTCQB and pinksheets.  Many OTC Issuers have faced a “DTC chill” without understanding what it is, let alone how to correct the problem.  In technical terms, a DTC chill is the suspension of certain DTC services with respect to an Issuer’s securities.  Those services can be book-entry clearing and settlement services, deposit services or withdrawal services.  A chill can pertain to one or all of these services.  In the case of a chill on all services, the term of art is a “global lock.”

I have previously blogged on how to become DTC-eligible.  From the DTC perspective, a chill does not change the eligibility status of an Issuer’s securities, just what services the DTC will offer for those securities.  So while

DTC Eligibility and the OTC Issuer (Part 3)

This is the third in a series of articles I am writing regarding DTC (Depository Trust Company) eligibility for OTC (Over the Counter) Issuers. OTC Issuers include all companies whose securities trade on the over the counter market, including the OTCBB, OTCQB and Pink Sheets.  All technical information in this article comes from the DTC website.

DTC Eligibility

As detailed in my first two articles in this series, in order to become and remain DTC eligible, and Issuer must have a transfer agent that has completed and has on file with DTC a DTC Operational Arrangements Agent Letter.  In addition, all Issuers must meet the requirements set forth in the DTC Operational Arrangements (OA).  This article begins to discuss the OA necessary for an Issue to become and remain eligible for DTC service.  Moreover, the OA rules relate to and regard all Issuers.  This article will only discuss those rules and requirements for OTC Issuers.

The DTC OA states:

“Generally,

DTC Eligibility and the OTC Issuer (Part 2)

This is the second in a series of articles regarding DTC (Depository Trust Company) eligibility for OTC (Over the Counter) Issuers.  OTC Issuers include all companies whose securities trade on the over the counter market, including the OTCBB, OTCQB and Pink Sheets. All technical information in this blog comes from the DTC website.

DTC Requirements for Eligibility

As discussed in my first article on this topic, Issuers, a sponsoring DTC Participant Member must make application to become DTC eligible.  The DTC Operational Arrangements criteria (available on the DTC website) set forth in-depth requirements for eligibility, which will be discussed in a separate articles in this series on DTC eligibility.  In addition to the Operational Arrangements, in order to be DTC eligible, an Issuer’s securities must:

(i)            be issued in a transaction registered with the SEC under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (“Securities Act”);

(ii)        be issued in a transaction exempt from registration under the Securities Act and

DTC Eligibility and the OTC Issuer

This is the first in a series of articles I am writing regarding DTC (Depository Trust Company) eligibility for OTC (Over the Counter) Issuers.  OTC Issuers include all companies whose securities trade on the Over the Counter market, including the OTCBB, OTCQB and PinkSheets.

DTC eligibility has become a major concern for OTC Issuers in the past year.  Obtaining and maintaining eligibility is of utmost importance for the smooth trading of an Issuer’s float in the secondary market.  Moreover, DTC eligibility is a prerequisite for OTC Issuers’ shareholders to deposit securities with their brokers and have such securities be placed in street name.  Most Issuers and many legal practitioners do not know or understand the eligibility requirements or procedures.

The DTC Application Process

First and foremost, like a Form 211 submittal to FINRA, an Issuer cannot make direct application to DTC for eligibility.  An application must be submitted and sponsored by a DTC Participant.  A current list of DTC Participants