The latest comments from the Securities and Exchange Commission on liquid puncture have triggered a mixture of optimism and concern, highlighting the regulatory gray area surrounding one of the fastest sectors of cryptography.
While some in the industry see non -binding advice as a step forward for institutional and detail, others warn that it leaves unresolved key legal questions and could face challenges.
“Firstly, these directives are not the law … and they could be challenged at some point,” said Scott Gralnick, head of institutional marinade in Marinade, at Cointelegraph.
“The industry must continue to work together to forge positive regulatory results.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tqgsmutq8g
The key to the DEC Declaration is a warning that it represents the views of a division within the agency, not the overall position of the agency. The notice of non-responsibility notes that the declaration is “not a rule, regulation, orientation or declaration” of the SEC.
A source familiar with the process told Cintelelegraph that staff councils are not abnormal and had no official vote of the Commission. However, this does not mean that the commissioners do not know the directives.
In relation: What is liquid stretch and how does it work?
More complex products
The liquid staggered, which allows users to gain clearing rewards while keeping their liquid and usable tokens, is more complex than traditional intention. Even among liquid ignition protocols, technical and operational models may vary considerably. Recent DEC personnel directives may not fully explain these differences.
“These guidelines confirm that liquid standby activities are not considered as a securities offer,” said Sam Kim, legal director of Lido Labs. “That said, there are still open regulatory issues around related areas such as replenishment, cross-jamming and more complex financial products built above the development. These areas will always require additional regulatory clarification.”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gu3jr-ddtke
According to the director of the soil strategies strategy, Michael Hubbard, protocols whose operations are purely administrative or ministerial – emission reception tokens on a single basis, allowing users to put into play without controlling the calendar or the amount and avoiding guaranteed yields – “can find a clarity of regularity within the framework of this framework.”
“However, the directives are very specific in its parameters and emphasize that any deviation from the described structure could cause different regulatory treatment,” Hubbard told Cointelegraph.
In relation: Liquid replenishment tokens compared to liquid stovers
Taxation problems
One of the crucial questions that the Decision of the DIV division left open is the taxation of the awards obtained thanks to the implementation of liquids. The awards would affect participants in the ecosystem, including stakers, young and old, which report to tax agencies.
“Some questions persist regarding the time of the taxation of the rewards of jealizing (whether at reception or available),” said Evan Weiss, head of the alluvial farm.
“This question is currently being legal examination in active cases, and there is significant advocacy at the level of the congress to seek a fair implementation tax treatment to support the continuous development of industry.
Another key problem is the rules of the Concitations trust tax, which govern the way assets are taxed when transferred after death. According to Weiss, these rules are the “main regulatory obstacle hampering the integration of participation in the negotiated funds on the stock market” and remains an “unresolved affair”.
Review: Ethereum returns – Blockchain Innovation or Dangerous House of Cards?
