Opinion: Margaret Rosenfeld, legal director Everstake

At the dawn of the Internet in the slow 1990s, technological regulation-and lawyers, engineers and decision-makers had to study together in real time. Some regulatory authorities perceived the Internet as a threat, others as a challenge.

However, those who made the most significant difference are people willing to directly get involved in the technology. This kind of commitment – technical fluidity, not technophobia – enabled the Internet to evolution from the novel product to known infrastructure.

The same applies now statement In the case of staking, it is an early sign that the agency begins to recognize the difference between participation in the network and investing in security.

A turning point for the regulation of cryptocurrencies

The SEC guidelines in May 2025 on specific activities related to the protocol for the first time meant Sec publicly recognized that some forms of pond could go beyond the definition of securities transactions. In this way he offered a long-awaited signal: contributing to blockchain consensus-especially in a non-having or protocols-may not require registration of securities.

This is a key change. If the erecting is properly treated as infrastructure, not speculative investments, this may equalize the US with other jurisdictions that have adopted a more refined approach.

The basic issue is the utilize of a legal Howey test. Over the years, critics have argued that erecting by nature includes “investing money in a joint enterprise with the expectations of profits from the efforts of others.” It is assumed that all rates resemble centralized income products-when many evidence mechanisms of rates work without promises, pool or performance promises. When the tokenists transfer validations, they aid secure the network, not conclude profit agreements.

This is not a theoretical distinction. The protocol treated as a securities transaction imposes extensive compliance: registration, disclosure, care requirements and duties that counteract fraud designed for customary financial instruments.

If these rules are applied to the Blockchain Open Source blockchain infrastructure, the result would be to frigid the activity of validators and pushing innovation at sea. However, diverse framework, which separates not free rates from care models or connects, retains investors’ protection and decentralization of the protocol.

The progress of politics begins with understanding at the level of the protocol

What enabled this more sophisticated regulatory understanding was not only legal theory, but also a technical explanation. An effective dialogue between regulatory bodies and the industry required more than presenting legal panties. This required a passage through operations of validators, mechanics of erecting and construction at the level of protocol with engineers, developers and infrastructure operators.

Last: Registration Trump Bitcoin State Treasury “Declared effective” by SEC

When regulatory bodies cooperate with lawyers and systems building, politics is rooted in real understanding. The latest SEC language reflects this kind of conscious, joint commitment.

The statement does not eliminate the risk of enforcement, especially in the case of platforms that are associated with a liquidity guarantee or profit assurances. It indicates that the agency is ready to look at technical realities.

The market effect of this change is significant. This gives American programmers and validators a stronger legal position and sends a signal to institutional participants that there is a place for the development of consistent infrastructure.

Commissioner Hester Peirce has long been calling for SEC to evaluate Blockchain services based on their actual project, and not the superficial reminding of Legacy Finance. According to this view, the novel agency guidelines by default recognize that not every modeling model includes “promoter”, “issuer” or the promise of profits. This change would allow programmers to build systems supporting network security without fear of launching securities regulations if it is properly implemented.

Skeptics say that every toke -based reward mechanism is by nature a financial return. It flattens a variety of blockchain protocols. Often, rewards for erecting are emissions defined by reports related to the participation of the network-a not discretionary payments from the centralized entity. Delegators maintain control over their assets, and the Walidates perform a technical, not financial service. The economic project is closer to system maintenance than capital investments.

This is not just a semantics – this is the basis of decentralized infrastructure. The application of one -off provisions regarding securities for such systems risk distortion of incentives, excessively regulating programmers and leaving the United States in global competition with blockchain talent.

That is why it is so vital that SEC seems to be cheerful to get involved in dialogue – not only dictates the results.

Building a smarter politics through cooperation

Better regulation does not always mean creating completely novel regulations. It means the interpretation of existing framework with full understanding of basic technology. This includes a diagnosis when certain actions-as well as rates are not free-do not meet the threshold of securities transactions, even if they resemble financial activities at the level of the area.

The SEC statement is not a sheltered port. This signals, however, that the involvement of technology is happening and that the SEC can be prepared for further distinction between infrastructure and investment. This is not only good politics – in this way innovations utilize.

Like the era of the Internet, Crypto evolves from border to the border to a friend – but only when regulatory bodies devote time to understanding how blockchain systems actually work. SEC on Staking shows that it is possible to understand. There will be more progress if the industry is still meeting decision-makers at the table-not only with legal arguments, but with education in the real world.

Opinion: Margaret Rosenfeld, legal director of Everstake.

This article is used for general information purposes and should not be and should not be treated as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts and opinions expressed here are themselves and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.