A joint letter submitted to the SEC on October 20 by six organizations—Chainlink Labs, the Cardano Foundation, Hedera, Aptos Labs, Ava Labs, and Stellar—makes a very specific request: move the definition of “digital commodities” and the conclusion that they are “not securities” from the preamble into the binding text of the rules.
Background: The SEC and CFTC’s joint guidance issued on March 17, 2026, already classified $LINK , $ADA , HBAR, APT, AVAX, and XLM as digital commodities, but only in the explanatory section. As a result, exchanges and market makers still don’t dare price them as “non-securities.” The letter also calls for a presumption in favor of secondary-market resales and for the safe harbor to be voluntary.
My take: This isn’t a technical detail—it’s about making the “compliance discount” something that can be priced in. Only when the definition is written into the rules themselves will institutions and market makers feel confident enough to increase their positions.
Will the SEC ultimately copy it verbatim? Which would you bet on first: $LINK or $ADA ?
Background: The SEC and CFTC’s joint guidance issued on March 17, 2026, already classified $LINK , $ADA , HBAR, APT, AVAX, and XLM as digital commodities, but only in the explanatory section. As a result, exchanges and market makers still don’t dare price them as “non-securities.” The letter also calls for a presumption in favor of secondary-market resales and for the safe harbor to be voluntary.
My take: This isn’t a technical detail—it’s about making the “compliance discount” something that can be priced in. Only when the definition is written into the rules themselves will institutions and market makers feel confident enough to increase their positions.
Will the SEC ultimately copy it verbatim? Which would you bet on first: $LINK or $ADA ?