<p><strong>如果出现问题，谁来监管？这两个看似简单的问题构成了美国加密货币监管长期混乱的根本原因。在过去几个月中，美国监管体系开始发出一系列新信号——这两个问题正在被重新回答。</strong></p>
<h2>监管迷雾</h2>
<p>在美国金融监管体系中，加密资产一直处于两个主要机构的管辖范围之间：证券交易委员会（SEC）和商品期货交易委员会（CFTC）。SEC 负责证券市场，而 CFTC 监管商品和衍生品交易。</p>
<h2>监管迷雾</h2>
<p>问题在于，加密资产同时具备这两种特征。一些代币具有融资属性，类似于证券。其他则更像数字商品或网络资源。因此，多年来，美国加密行业面临着一个核心的不确定性：同一资产可以同时被两套监管逻辑解读。许多业内人士将这种情况称为 “监管迷雾”。公司往往难以确定特定产品应遵循哪一套规则。在某些情况下，公司甚至必须同时应对两个监管机构。这种监管冲突的影响超出了法律争议，直接影响公司的商业决策。SEC 主席 Paul Atkins 在一次公开演讲中承认，监管冲突、重复注册要求和不同的规则体系在某种程度上扼杀了创新，并将一些市场参与者驱逐到其他管辖区。换句话说，美国监管体系内部的分歧本身正在削弱其对加密行业的吸引力。加密资产应如何分类？长期以来，“加密资产” 这一概念在美国联邦证券法中并不存在。监管机构通常依赖 Howey 测试来确定某项资产是否为证券，而该测试用于判断一项交易是否构成投资合同。简单来说，如果投资者投入资金并主要依赖他人的运营努力来获取利润，那么这种安排可能被视为证券。几十年来，这一标准一直是美国证券监管的核心基础。但当这一逻辑应用于加密资产时，问题变得更加复杂。一些代币显然具有投资属性。一些更像是网络使用凭证。而一些则仅仅是数字收藏品。在同一市场中，资产的性质可能截然不同。为了应对这种复杂性，SEC 在 2025 年 11 月提出了一种新的监管方法。SEC 主席 Paul Atkins 表示，SEC 正在基于 Howey 测试构建一个四类代币分类框架。该框架将数字资产分为四种类型：数字商品或网络代币。这个分类框架也意味着……美国监管机构首次系统性地承认并非所有加密资产都是证券。但即使资产类型开始变得更加清晰，另一个问题仍然存在。如果某些代币被归类为数字商品，谁最终拥有监管权？在美国金融体系中，商品市场的主要监管机构是 CFTC。这意味着一旦某些数字资产被视为商品，监管权就不再完全归 SEC 所有。这正是过去几年 SEC 和 CFTC 之间长期存在的制度冲突。最近，这种长期的监管分歧开始显现出缓和的迹象。SEC 和 CFTC 宣布签署了一份谅解备忘录（MOU），承诺在多个领域加强协调，包括：加密资产监管。</p>
<p>新数字资产产品</p>

纳斯达克 NexGen 经济 ETF - Reality Shares

COIN

<p>美国加密货币行业面临着为期十年的监管斗争，涉及证券交易委员会（SEC）和商品期货交易委员会（CFTC），关于加密资产的分类和监管仍存在未解决的问题。SEC 提出了一种新的四类代币分类框架，承认并非所有加密资产都是证券。SEC 与 CFTC 之间的近期合作旨在增强在加密资产监管、投资者保护以及建立联邦级政策框架方面的协调。这一转变可能标志着解决美国加密货币监管混乱的转折点</p>

<p><strong>If problems arise, who will regulate them? These two seemingly simple questions constitute the root cause of the long-standing chaos in US cryptocurrency regulation. In the past few months, the US regulatory system has begun to give a series of new signals—these two questions are being re-answered.</strong></p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p><strong>如果出现问题，谁来监管？这两个看似简单的问题构成了美国加密货币监管长期混乱的根本原因。在过去几个月中，美国监管体系开始发出一系列新信号——这两个问题正在被重新回答。</strong></p>
</div><h2>Regulatory Fog</h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2>监管迷雾</h2>
</div><p>In the US financial regulatory system, crypto assets have always been situated between the jurisdictions of two major agencies: the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). The SEC is responsible for the securities market, while the CFTC regulates commodities and derivatives trading.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>在美国金融监管体系中，加密资产一直处于两个主要机构的管辖范围之间：证券交易委员会（SEC）和商品期货交易委员会（CFTC）。SEC 负责证券市场，而 CFTC 监管商品和衍生品交易。</p>
</div><h2>Regulatory Fog</h2>
<div class="lb-trans"><h2>监管迷雾</h2>
</div><p>The problem is that crypto assets possess both characteristics simultaneously. Some tokens have financing properties and resemble securities. Others are more like digital goods or network resources. Therefore, for many years, the US crypto industry has faced a core uncertainty: the same asset can be interpreted by two sets of regulatory logics simultaneously. This situation is referred to by many industry insiders as: &#34;regulatory fog&#34;. Companies often find it difficult to determine which set of rules a particular product should comply with. In some cases, companies even have to deal with two regulatory agencies simultaneously. The impact of such regulatory conflicts goes beyond legal disputes. It directly affects companies' business decisions. SEC Chairman Paul Atkins acknowledged in a public speech that regulatory conflicts, duplicate registration requirements, and different rule systems have, to some extent, stifled innovation and driven some market participants to other jurisdictions. In other words, the divisions within the US regulatory system are themselves diminishing its appeal to the crypto industry. How should crypto assets be classified? For a long time, the concept of &#34;crypto assets&#34; did not exist in U.S. federal securities laws. Regulatory bodies typically rely on the Howey Test to determine whether an asset is a security, and this test is used to determine whether a transaction constitutes an investment contract. Simply put, if investors invest funds and primarily rely on the operational efforts of others to generate profits, then such an arrangement may be considered a security. For decades, this standard has been a core foundation of U.S. securities regulation. But when this logic is applied to crypto assets, the issue becomes more complex. Some tokens clearly possess investment attributes. Some are more like network usage credentials. And some are simply digital collectibles. In the same market, assets can be entirely different in nature. To address this complexity, the SEC proposed a new regulatory approach in November 2025. SEC Chairman Paul Atkins stated that the SEC is building a four-category token classification framework based on the Howe Test. This framework categorizes digital assets into four types: Digital Goods or Network Tokens. This classification framework also signifies that... For the first time, US regulators have systematically acknowledged that not all crypto assets are securities. But even as asset types begin to become clearer, another question remains. If certain tokens are classified as digital commodities, who ultimately has the regulatory power? In the US financial system, the primary regulatory body for commodity markets is the CFTC. This means that once certain digital assets are considered commodities, regulatory power no longer entirely rests with the SEC. This is precisely the long-standing institutional conflict between the SEC and CFTC over the past few years. Recently, this long-standing regulatory divergence has begun to show signs of easing. The SEC and CFTC announced the signing of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU), committing to strengthen coordination in several areas, including: Crypto Asset Regulation.</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>问题在于，加密资产同时具备这两种特征。一些代币具有融资属性，类似于证券。其他则更像数字商品或网络资源。因此，多年来，美国加密行业面临着一个核心的不确定性：同一资产可以同时被两套监管逻辑解读。许多业内人士将这种情况称为 “监管迷雾”。公司往往难以确定特定产品应遵循哪一套规则。在某些情况下，公司甚至必须同时应对两个监管机构。这种监管冲突的影响超出了法律争议，直接影响公司的商业决策。SEC 主席 Paul Atkins 在一次公开演讲中承认，监管冲突、重复注册要求和不同的规则体系在某种程度上扼杀了创新，并将一些市场参与者驱逐到其他管辖区。换句话说，美国监管体系内部的分歧本身正在削弱其对加密行业的吸引力。加密资产应如何分类？长期以来，“加密资产” 这一概念在美国联邦证券法中并不存在。监管机构通常依赖 Howey 测试来确定某项资产是否为证券，而该测试用于判断一项交易是否构成投资合同。简单来说，如果投资者投入资金并主要依赖他人的运营努力来获取利润，那么这种安排可能被视为证券。几十年来，这一标准一直是美国证券监管的核心基础。但当这一逻辑应用于加密资产时，问题变得更加复杂。一些代币显然具有投资属性。一些更像是网络使用凭证。而一些则仅仅是数字收藏品。在同一市场中，资产的性质可能截然不同。为了应对这种复杂性，SEC 在 2025 年 11 月提出了一种新的监管方法。SEC 主席 Paul Atkins 表示，SEC 正在基于 Howey 测试构建一个四类代币分类框架。该框架将数字资产分为四种类型：数字商品或网络代币。这个分类框架也意味着……美国监管机构首次系统性地承认并非所有加密资产都是证券。但即使资产类型开始变得更加清晰，另一个问题仍然存在。如果某些代币被归类为数字商品，谁最终拥有监管权？在美国金融体系中，商品市场的主要监管机构是 CFTC。这意味着一旦某些数字资产被视为商品，监管权就不再完全归 SEC 所有。这正是过去几年 SEC 和 CFTC 之间长期存在的制度冲突。最近，这种长期的监管分歧开始显现出缓和的迹象。SEC 和 CFTC 宣布签署了一份谅解备忘录（MOU），承诺在多个领域加强协调，包括：加密资产监管。</p>
</div><p>New Digital Asset Products</p>
<div class="lb-trans"><p>新数字资产产品</p>
</div>

The decade-long power struggle between the SEC and CFTC is reaching a turning point.

- 美国加密货币监管长期处于混乱状态，面临不明确的监管角色。  
- SEC 和 CFTC 之间的界限模糊，导致创新受阻，市场参与者流失。  
- 最近，SEC 和 CFTC 签署谅解备忘录，承诺加强加密资产监管协调。

CoinLive

Hut 8 Mining

Coinbase

Bitwise Bitcoin ETF

American Bitcoin

Grayscale Ethereum Staking ETF

Fidelity Wise Origin Bitcoin Fund - ETF

Bitwise Solana Staking ETF

CoinShares Bitcoin ETF

Riot Platforms

Grayscale Solana Staking ETF

Franklin Bitcoin ETF

Marathon Digital

Circle

区块链 ETF - Amplify

ARK 21Shares Bitcoin ETF

VanEck Bitcoin ETF

Galaxy Digital

WisdomTree Bitcoin Fund

Bakkt

ProShares Bitcoin Strategy ETF

Grayscale Bitcoin Trust BTC - ETF

Invesco Galaxy Bitcoin ETF

iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF

美国证券交易委员会（SEC）与商品期货交易委员会（CFTC）之间长达十年的权力斗争正迎来一个转折点