The SEC Just Wrote Its Own Crypto Rulebook While Congress Was Out of Town. It Leaves Out Congress's Insider Lockup.

The Old Men·August 22, 2026

Subscribe Free. The weekly briefing is free, always.

The Commission Moved First

On August 18, 2026, the Securities and Exchange Commission proposed Regulation Crypto Assets, the first bespoke offering regime for tokens in the agency’s history. The timing was not subtle. Earlier this month the Senate confirmed it would not vote on the CLARITY Act before the August recess. Three weeks ago we called the bill stalled, with Polymarket still near 30%. Since then Galaxy Research has cut its 2026 passage odds to 10%, and the contract that sat at 82% in February has slid under 20%. Congress left town. The SEC published.

The proposal creates two new exemptions from registration for token offerings: a one-time startup exemption of up to $5 million, and a fundraising exemption of up to $75 million in any 12-month period. On top of those sits a conditional safe harbor that lets a token shed the “investment contract” label once the issuer has finished, or permanently abandoned, the managerial work it promised buyers. And it preempts state registration and qualification requirements for qualifying offerings and certain secondary trades, a blue-sky override that gives the SEC’s version a federal uniformity mechanism CLARITY approaches differently.

The proposal was published in the Federal Register on August 21. Comments are due October 20.

Hold that date. It matters more than it looks.

The Rule That Isn’t In It

The House-passed CLARITY Act, Section 204, tells insiders to wait. Founders, early employees, venture backers, anyone the bill calls a “related” or “affiliated” person, face a minimum holding period on directly acquired tokens while a network is still maturing, along with limits on how much they can sell. The theory is simple: insiders know more than retail buyers while a protocol is still being built, and a forced vest-and-hold schedule is what stops a coordinated dump on the people who funded the build. The House ultimately put those protections directly into the bill.

Regulation Crypto Assets takes a different path. It caps how much affiliates can sell through the fundraising exemptions: under the $75 million Tier 2 lane, for example, affiliate sales may not exceed $22.5 million. It requires disclosure of whether “related persons” are subject to resale restrictions. What it does not do is impose a holding period. Regulation Crypto Assets itself imposes no additional minimum holding period once the applicable securities-law resale restrictions no longer apply, unless the issuer has imposed its own lockup. Caps, but no clock.

The SEC knows exactly what it left out. Buried in the request for comment is a question asking whether the Commission should add a one-year insider holding period. Congress already answered that question. The SEC is asking it again.

That is the heart of this story. Not “the SEC versus Congress,” because CLARITY is not law and the SEC has said all year that its framework is meant to complement the bill. Chairman Paul Atkins previewed the $5 million startup lane, the $75 million fundraising lane and the safe harbor back in March, months before the Senate calendar fell apart. The SEC did not invent this rulebook after CLARITY stalled. What changed in August is what the rulebook means. A proposal written to sit underneath legislation may now be the only thing standing where the legislation was supposed to go, and it does not carry the protection Congress wrote into CLARITY on one of the questions retail buyers care about most: when the people who made the token are allowed to sell it.

Why This Is the Fallback Plan, Not a Land Grab

It would be easy to read the last two weeks as regulators claiming turf from a paralyzed Congress. The facts point somewhere else.

On August 19, the day after the proposal, the White House hosted a crypto summit at the Eisenhower Executive Office Building with Atkins and CFTC Chairman Michael Selig in the same room as Coinbase, Ripple, a16z, Paradigm, Chainlink, Kalshi, Nasdaq, CME, ICE and DTCC. That morning Brian Armstrong, Brad Garlinghouse, Chris Dixon and Kraken’s Arjun Sethi met Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick to talk through the bill’s remaining ethics hurdles and how to find bipartisan votes. On August 20, Selig told the CFTC’s new Innovation Advisory Committee that if CLARITY keeps stalling, his staff will use the agency’s existing authorities to start building a crypto market-structure regime, and to work out how on-chain protocol developers can operate legally.

That is not a turf war. That is an administration building the same house by two routes at once: push the statute through the Senate if it can, and have the SEC and CFTC pour the foundation under existing law in case it can’t. The industry executives in those rooms were lobbying for the bill and sitting across from the regulators whose rules would fill the gap if it failed, on the same day.

The catch is that agency rules are not statutes. Regulation Crypto Assets will go through cost-benefit analysis, a comment period and, almost certainly, litigation. A future Commission can rewrite it. The CFTC’s version, if it comes, leans on authority over derivatives and spot-market fraud, not the routine supervisory power over spot exchanges that only Congress can grant. Every lawyer, compliance officer and tokenization platform now has to prepare for two possible worlds, because nobody knows which regulatory architecture will actually govern the market in 2028.

What This Means for Tokenization

In July we wrote that the infrastructure rollout was not waiting for Congress. Neither, now, are the regulators. If you are building a cap table platform, a real estate tokenization vehicle or a private equity token offering, you now face a real choice: structure for the SEC’s proposed exemptions, or wait to see whether Congress revives CLARITY with different terms. The $75 million lane is big enough to matter for mid-market companies and small enough to exclude the billion-dollar launches the industry wanted legitimized. The safe harbor sounds clean, decentralize enough and the token sheds its securities label, until you try to define “enough.” The proposal lists factors. It does not draw a bright line.

Stablecoins are on a separate track. The GENIUS Act takes effect on January 18, 2027 at the latest, or earlier if final implementing regulations trigger the statute’s 120-day provision. Regulators missed the law’s July deadline for final rules, but implementation is moving: Treasury’s rules are out for comment, and Comptroller Jonathan Gould said this week the OCC “will have a final rule out by November” so it can start processing applications in the new year. Stablecoins have their framework. Tokens do not.

The tracks do cross. Franklin Templeton said this week it plans to put its roughly $726 million tokenized money-market fund, BENJI, inside conventional mutual funds and ETFs as a cash holding and as collateral, starting as early as the fourth quarter. It can do that because the SEC’s Division of Investment Management granted no-action relief on August 12, which we covered last week. That relief did not come from CLARITY and it did not come from Regulation Crypto Assets. It came from the same case-by-case process that has governed tokenization for years, the one that cleared Paxos to settle Wall Street trades on blockchain in May, and it means ordinary fund investors could soon have indirect exposure to a blockchain-native fund without ever making that choice themselves. Regulation Crypto Assets formalizes part of that process for token offerings. It does not settle the SEC-CFTC boundary, and it says nothing about what happens when a tokenized security moves across chains or a DeFi protocol lists it without a registered intermediary.

What to Watch

The two processes now overlap, which is the part that makes the next eight weeks interesting.

First, September 15. The Senate returns September 14 and a procedural vote on CLARITY is expected the next day, with roughly 14 working days before midterm politics eat the floor. If the bill clears cloture, the insider-lockup gap becomes a conference problem. If it fails, Regulation Crypto Assets stops being a complement and starts being the framework.

Second, the comment file. Comments on the SEC proposal run through October 20, so the industry will be filing its views on the SEC’s rulebook while it is still lobbying the Senate for the statutory one. Read the letters from Coinbase, Ripple, a16z and the exchanges carefully. If they ask the SEC to add a holding period, it would suggest they expect Congress to fail and want the regulators’ version to carry the compromise. If they stay quiet on the holding-period question, it would suggest they are comfortable letting the SEC framework proceed without one.

Third, the CFTC. Selig has put staff on notice. If a CFTC proposal appears before the comment window closes, the administration’s two-track plan is fully in motion. If it doesn’t, the SEC’s version is the one on the table.

Congress spent more than a year negotiating what a durable crypto framework should say. The regulators are now writing one of their own under the authority they already have, and their version does not contain the rule that made founders wait. Whether that rule comes back depends on a Senate vote three weeks from now, not on anything the SEC does between now and October.

Presented by The Bridge. Weekly institutional research on blockchain, agentics, and tokenization, written for hedge funds, asset managers, and corporates. Because you read OMNM, the retail edition is yours for $349 (normally $399): thebridgenewsletter.com/signup?ref=omnm. OMNM co-host Douglas Borthwick co-founded The Bridge with Steve Kraus; we may earn a commission.