#cftc更新受监管机构代币化资产指引
👉 链上记录，第一次有了条件清单
The CFTC updated its guidance for tokenized assets.
The document explains how on-chain records are recognized.
Storing records on a blockchain must meet several conditions.
There are specific clauses covering how records are stored and who verifies them.
On the same day, the SEC also updated its FAQs.
With both sides moving at once, the interpretation is clearer than before.
The area covering custody and record-keeping used to be the most vague.
What was vague has now been written into conditions.
When institutions handle accounting, they fear most that procedures and regulation won’t match.
When institutions enter the market, what they fear most is that this area can’t be clarified.
Once it’s aligned, the boundaries of responsibility for custodians are clarified.
With responsibilities clear, the product structure can be designed more easily.
For RWA issuers, this layer is especially important.
After the guidance is implemented, product structures can be designed in advance.
Designing ahead of time is cheaper than fixing things afterward.
For crypto, the compliance boundary has been pushed forward by one step.
Once the boundary is clear, on-chain assets are easier to move through institutional processes.
Do you think this guidance benefits custodians first, or RWA first? Let’s discuss in the comments.
👉 链上记录，第一次有了条件清单
The CFTC updated its guidance for tokenized assets.
The document explains how on-chain records are recognized.
Storing records on a blockchain must meet several conditions.
There are specific clauses covering how records are stored and who verifies them.
On the same day, the SEC also updated its FAQs.
With both sides moving at once, the interpretation is clearer than before.
The area covering custody and record-keeping used to be the most vague.
What was vague has now been written into conditions.
When institutions handle accounting, they fear most that procedures and regulation won’t match.
When institutions enter the market, what they fear most is that this area can’t be clarified.
Once it’s aligned, the boundaries of responsibility for custodians are clarified.
With responsibilities clear, the product structure can be designed more easily.
For RWA issuers, this layer is especially important.
After the guidance is implemented, product structures can be designed in advance.
Designing ahead of time is cheaper than fixing things afterward.
For crypto, the compliance boundary has been pushed forward by one step.
Once the boundary is clear, on-chain assets are easier to move through institutional processes.
Do you think this guidance benefits custodians first, or RWA first? Let’s discuss in the comments.
