A key difference between CLARITY and Senate market structure draft:
A centralized token with no material function has a better chance of qualifying for non-security treatment under the ancillary asset framework than a decentralized network like Ethereum, Cosmos, etc.
The Senate framework rewards issuer inactivity rather than decentralization, and risks penalizing the very networks that are most aligned with open, transparent, and secure blockchain principles.
Under the Senate draft, if a foundation is deemed to engage in material ongoing efforts that primarily determine the token’s value (a vague and subjective standard) the token may be disqualified from ancillary asset treatment and therefore still be considered a security.
By contrast, under the CLARITY Act, a token can still be treated as a digital commodity even if a foundation remains active, as long as no party retains unilateral control. In that case, the foundation would simply need to provide some basic disclosures; many of which certain foundations already provide.
10.97K
13
The content on this page is provided by third parties. Unless otherwise stated, OKX is not the author of the cited article(s) and does not claim any copyright in the materials. The content is provided for informational purposes only and does not represent the views of OKX. It is not intended to be an endorsement of any kind and should not be considered investment advice or a solicitation to buy or sell digital assets. To the extent generative AI is utilized to provide summaries or other information, such AI generated content may be inaccurate or inconsistent. Please read the linked article for more details and information. OKX is not responsible for content hosted on third party sites. Digital asset holdings, including stablecoins and NFTs, involve a high degree of risk and can fluctuate greatly. You should carefully consider whether trading or holding digital assets is suitable for you in light of your financial condition.