SEC crypto fundraising framework delayed after Wall Street SIFMA pushback
The SEC abruptly canceled a Friday open meeting that would have launched formal rulemaking for “Regulation Crypto Assets,” a new U.S. crypto fundraising framework. The SEC cited an “unforeseen scheduling issue,” but sources say Wall Street pushback and legal pressure played a role.
According to the report, the White House asked the SEC to postpone the SEC crypto fundraising framework discussion because Reg Crypto Assets—and, separately, a potential SEC innovation exemption—could complicate negotiations on the Clarity Act. The Clarity Act, covering crypto fundraising and tokenized securities, is targeted for a Senate procedural vote and a September 15 cloture vote.
The key friction involves SIFMA (the Securities Industry and Financial Markets Association), which has lobbied against broad regulatory exemptions and argued for notice-and-comment rulemaking. Two sources say SIFMA discussed the possibility of legal action if it believed the SEC exceeded its statutory authority.
Policy momentum continues this week: a White House event on Wednesday with SEC Chair Paul Atkins and CFTC Chair Michael Selig plus major crypto executives, and the CFTC’s inaugural Innovation Advisory Committee meeting on Thursday.
For traders, the immediate takeaway is that the SEC crypto fundraising framework is now delayed, raising uncertainty around U.S. compliance timelines for tokenized-securities and fundraising structures while the Clarity Act advances through Congress.
Bearish
This is likely bearish for risk appetite in the short term. The SEC crypto fundraising framework delay reduces the odds of near-term regulatory clarity for tokenized securities and fundraising structures. In markets, “policy delay vs policy progress” often triggers a wait-and-see mode, similar to prior U.S. regulatory rollbacks or postponements where uncertainty compressed speculative positioning until timelines stabilized.
Traders may also price in heightened legal and political friction (SIFMA’s threat of potential legal action, White House involvement), which can extend volatility around compliance narratives. However, the longer-term impact may be neutral to mildly supportive if the Clarity Act ultimately passes and formal rulemaking is resumed—so the main effect is timing uncertainty rather than a permanent shutdown of the U.S. regulatory path.