The regulatory landscape for cryptocurrencies and initial coin offerings (ICOs) varies significantly across the globe. While a few countries have taken an outright ban approach, most governments adopt a cautious stance—balancing innovation against potential misuse in illegal activities, financial instability, or security risks.
As home to the world’s largest securities market and one of the most active ecosystems for blockchain fundraising, the United States plays a pivotal role in shaping global crypto policy. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is closely watched by regulators, investors, and developers worldwide. Its decisions often set precedents that influence how digital assets are classified and governed internationally.
In a landmark development, William Hinman, former Director of the SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance, declared during a speech at Yahoo Finance’s All Markets Summit in 2018 that both Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) are not securities. This followed earlier comments from then-SEC Chair Jay Clayton, who stated that Bitcoin functions more like a replacement for sovereign currency rather than an investment contract.
👉 Discover how regulatory clarity is shaping the future of crypto investments.
The announcement sparked immediate market reactions—Ethereum’s price surged nearly 6% within an hour and gained over 12% during the day. More importantly, it provided long-awaited clarity on the legal status of two of the largest cryptocurrencies by market capitalization.
Understanding the SEC’s Two-Pronged Framework for Non-Security Classification
So, what criteria does the SEC use to determine whether a digital asset qualifies as a security? According to Hinman’s remarks, two core principles guide this determination:
1. Decentralization of Network Structure
The primary factor is whether the network behind the cryptocurrency is decentralized. The SEC applies the Howey Test—the legal standard for identifying investment contracts—to assess if buyers expect profits derived from the efforts of others.
If a third party or central entity controls the network and users anticipate returns based on that entity’s work, the asset may be deemed a security. However, Hinman emphasized that both Bitcoin and Ethereum operate on truly decentralized public networks, where no single group exerts dominant control. In such cases, investor expectations are not tied to specific managerial efforts, thus falling outside the definition of a security.
2. Role of Founders and Promoters in Ongoing Development
The second criterion examines the ongoing involvement of individuals or organizations in the development and promotion of the project. If founders or core teams continue to play a critical role in driving value—such as through upgrades, marketing, or funding—then purchasers may reasonably expect those efforts to impact price performance.
In contrast, when a project has evolved to a point where no individual or centralized group significantly influences its success, and the network operates autonomously through community consensus or decentralized governance, it moves further away from being classified as a security.
Hinman summarized this transition clearly:
“When there is no longer a central enterprise being invested in, and when the ability of third-party efforts to impact the enterprise’s success becomes negligible, the asset may not constitute an investment contract.”
This distinction is crucial—it implies that some tokens might start as securities during early fundraising phases (like ICOs), but evolve into non-securities over time as decentralization strengthens.
Why Regulatory Clarity Matters for Market Growth
While Bitcoin and Ethereum received favorable treatment, the SEC made it clear: many ICOs still qualify as securities and must comply with federal securities laws. Registration, disclosure requirements, and investor protections apply accordingly.
However, recognizing that not all blockchain projects are investment vehicles marks a significant step toward mature regulation. The SEC acknowledged that distributed ledger technology offers transformative potential beyond finance—enabling secure data sharing, transparent supply chains, efficient intellectual property management, and streamlined asset transfers.
👉 Learn how blockchain innovation thrives under clear regulatory frameworks.
By differentiating between true securities and decentralized digital assets, regulators can protect investors without stifling technological progress. A well-defined boundary allows compliant projects to innovate safely while deterring fraudulent schemes hiding behind "crypto" labels.
The Ripple Effect: What Comes Next?
With BTC and ETH officially recognized as non-securities by the SEC, attention turns to other major digital assets—particularly Ripple (XRP), which has faced prolonged legal scrutiny over its classification.
Although Hinman did not address XRP directly in his speech, his framework offers insight into how future rulings might unfold. If Ripple’s network demonstrates sufficient decentralization and reduced reliance on its founding team, it could potentially follow BTC and ETH into non-security territory—though this remains subject to ongoing litigation and regulatory interpretation.
Market participants now watch closely: Will the SEC formalize these standards into official guidance? Could other large-cap cryptocurrencies seek similar clarity? And how will international regulators respond?
Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
Q: Does the SEC officially classify Bitcoin and Ethereum as non-securities?
Yes. While the SEC hasn't issued a formal rulemaking order, senior officials including William Hinman have publicly stated that Bitcoin and Ethereum do not meet the definition of a security due to their decentralized nature.
Q: Can a cryptocurrency change from being a security to a non-security?
Yes. According to the SEC, a digital asset may initially be sold as part of an investment contract (i.e., a security) during an ICO but lose that status over time if the network becomes sufficiently decentralized.
Q: Are all ICOs considered securities?
Not automatically—but most are likely to be classified as securities if they involve investors contributing money with expectations of profit driven by a central team’s efforts. Each case depends on its specific facts and circumstances.
Q: What is the Howey Test?
The Howey Test is a legal framework established by the U.S. Supreme Court to determine whether a transaction qualifies as an "investment contract." If yes, it falls under securities law. It asks:
- Is there an investment of money?
- In a common enterprise?
- With an expectation of profit primarily from others’ efforts?
Q: How does decentralization affect regulatory status?
Greater decentralization reduces reliance on any single entity’s efforts, weakening the basis for applying the Howey Test. Thus, highly decentralized networks like Bitcoin and Ethereum are less likely to be deemed securities.
Q: What should investors consider regarding crypto regulation?
Investors should assess whether a project operates transparently, complies with applicable laws, and discloses risks clearly. Assets labeled as "utility tokens" aren’t automatically exempt from securities rules—if they function like investments, regulators may treat them as such.
👉 Stay ahead of regulatory trends with trusted crypto insights.
Final Thoughts
The SEC’s clarification on Bitcoin and Ethereum sets a foundational precedent for crypto regulation in the U.S. By focusing on decentralization and economic reality—not just technical labels—it promotes a nuanced understanding of digital assets.
As blockchain technology evolves, so too must regulatory thinking. Clear standards empower innovators, protect users, and foster sustainable growth in the digital economy. The journey toward comprehensive crypto policy continues—but with BTC and ETH now firmly outside the securities category, the path forward looks increasingly defined.
Core Keywords: Bitcoin, Ethereum, SEC, non-security standards, decentralization, cryptocurrency regulation, ICO compliance