Exchange Ranking
Top Exchanges
24h Volume Ranking
Popularity Ranking
Exchange BTC Balance
Proof of Reserves
Decentralized Exchanges
Funding Rate
Funding Heatmap
Liquidation Data
Max Pain
Long/Short Ratio
Whale L/S Ratio
Binance/Okex/Huobi L/S
Bitfinex Margin L/S
ETF Tracker
Solana ETF
XRP ETF
Hong Kong ETF
Bitcoin Treasuries
Crypto Reversal
Ethereum Reserves
HyperLiquid Wallet Analysis
Hyperliquid Whale Watch
Large Transactions
On-chain Movement
Bitcoin ROI
Stablecoin Market Cap
Options Analysis
News
Articles
Economic Calendar
Features
Wallet
Contract Calculator
Security
Collections
Watchlist
Following
BTC The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission reactivates proposal for cryptocurrency custody rules
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has reactivated a proposal for cryptocurrency custody rules, resurfacing a policy issue closely related to Bitcoin's core commitment to self-custody, and also putting the SEC's proposal for cryptocurrency custody rules back on the agency's active regulatory agenda.
Why the SEC restarted the cryptocurrency custody proposal
The proposal appears as an active project on the SEC's rule-making agenda with the corresponding regulatory identification number RIN3235-AN46-a number used to track specific regulatory actions within the federal rule-making system. The proposal is placed on the agency's active agenda, indicating that it is intended to advance, but is not a completed operation. The restart proposal does not amount to a final rule. It marks the start of a rule-making path that may still be revised, postponed or revoked before it is formally adopted.
The core issue is custody, that is, who has the right to hold customers 'digital assets and what security measures should be followed. The current effort follows a previous trusteeship push that the previous government failed to finalize.
What the proposal may mean for businesses and investors
Custody standards define the safeguards that investment advisers and qualified custodians must comply with when custodial assets on behalf of clients. Investment advisers and custodians handling digital assets are the groups most likely to feel the impact of the new requirements first, as custody rules are directly related to their operational and compliance obligations.
Custody is a core issue in digital asset regulation because it determines whether the key is controlled by intermediaries or asset holders. For Bitcoin, the contradiction is particularly acute: the network was designed to allow holders to keep their own tokens directly, and any rule that directs assets to designated custodians will hit this design choice head-on.
The debate weighs two arguments for regulators to balance over the long term in other areas. Custody frameworks can increase compliance costs and restrict which companies can hold assets; their stated purpose is to protect investors from loss, theft or misappropriation. In similar custody and security topics, they have appeared in related law enforcement cases involving cryptocurrency revenue products, where the issue of control of customer assets is at the core.
What to focus on next
The next procedural node is whether the SEC will move RIN3235-AN46 from an active agenda to a formal proposal rule and open a public comment period. Prior to this, companies were unable to evaluate specific rule texts.
Once specific wording appears, industry trade groups and investment advisory representative bodies will be the first to respond, because the trusteeship rules are directly related to the interests of their members. Legal review is likely to focus on the definition of a "qualified custodian" and how it applies to digital assets.
The future of the proposal depends entirely on the formal rulemaking process-a process that has also shaped other controversial policy battles, from strategic bitcoin reserve advances in related bills to actions at the national and international levels, such as warnings from Belgian financial regulators against unauthorized providers. For Bitcoin holders, the real stake is whether the final rule retains or restricts the network's natively held option to control the key without an intermediary.
