Bitwise and Hyperliquid have urged the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to revise its approach to crypto token classification, secondary-market trading and airdrops, as the agency’s public comment period closes.
Disclaimer: News content is based on public news sources and provided for information only. It does not constitute investment advice.
Bitwise and Hyperliquid have asked the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission for rule changes and clearer guidance on crypto token trading and airdrops. Their requests focus on how crypto assets are classified and how secondary-market trading should be treated under federal securities rules. The effort comes as the SEC’s public comment period draws to a close, giving market participants a formal window to present their views. The firms are seeking more defined standards rather than leaving key questions to case-by-case enforcement.
The classification of a crypto token can determine whether it falls under U.S. securities law and what registration or disclosure obligations may apply. That distinction affects token issuers, trading platforms and intermediaries, because each category can trigger different compliance requirements. Secondary-market trading adds another layer, since platforms and brokers must know how the assets they list or facilitate are treated. Bitwise and Hyperliquid’s request therefore goes to the core of how crypto market structure is regulated in the United States.
Airdrops distribute tokens to users, often without a direct purchase, and can raise questions about whether the distribution involves a securities offering or requires registration. Secondary-market trading raises separate questions about how platforms facilitate transactions and what obligations apply to them. By linking token trading and airdrops in their request, the firms are asking the SEC to address both distribution and later-market activity. Clearer guidance could reduce ambiguity for projects, exchanges and U.S. users, though any actual change would depend on the SEC’s formal process.
The SEC’s public comment period is a standard part of agency rulemaking and allows firms, investors and other stakeholders to submit views before rules are finalized. Crypto companies have repeatedly sought clearer definitions from the SEC, arguing that enforcement-led approaches leave compliance uncertain. Bitwise is known for crypto-focused investment products, while Hyperliquid operates a decentralized trading platform, giving the request input from both asset management and trading-market perspectives. The comment period does not itself change the rules; it is a step that can inform future SEC guidance or rulemaking. Based on public news sources.
They are seeking clearer guidance and rule changes on how crypto tokens are classified, how secondary-market trading is treated, and how airdrops fit under securities rules. The requests come as the SEC’s public comment period closes, giving the firms a formal chance to argue for more defined standards.
Classification can determine whether a token is subject to securities registration and disclosure requirements. That in turn affects issuers, trading platforms and investors because different legal categories trigger different compliance obligations.
Airdrops distribute tokens to users, often without direct payment, so regulators may examine whether the distribution is a securities offering or involves marketing and registration issues. Clearer guidance would help projects and platforms understand their obligations.
Public comment periods let firms, investors and other stakeholders present views before an agency finalizes rules. For crypto, the process is a key venue for debates over classification and market structure.
What the Two Firms Asked For
Why Token Classification Matters
Airdrops and Secondary-Market Trading
Industry Context and Regulatory Process
This article is rewritten from public news sources and further processed by AI. It is provided for information only and does not constitute investment advice — refer to the original source for the authoritative version.
No. The firms are requesting changes and clearer guidance; the public comment period is part of the agency’s process, not a final rule. Any actual change would come through the SEC’s formal rulemaking or guidance procedures.
