Regulatory Developments: SEC and EU MiCA See Parallel Progress
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has proposed a new crypto asset custody framework that would allow certain regulated funds to hold their own crypto private keys. Meanwhile, Circle is calling on the EU to amend its MiCA stablecoin rules. According to news materials, only 3 of the world's top 30 stablecoins are compliant. These two regulatory developments respectively target crypto asset custody and stablecoin compliance, both of which could impact how industry participants operate.
SEC Custody Framework: Certain Regulated Funds May Self-Custody Private Keys
On the custody front, the SEC's proposed new framework would allow certain regulated funds to hold their own crypto private keys. This change is described as potentially altering how funds hold crypto assets, with significant regulatory implications. According to the source material, the framework targets certain regulated funds, not all funds. This means that regulated funds, upon meeting specific conditions, may no longer rely entirely on third-party custody arrangements and could instead directly control crypto asset private keys. However, the only confirmable information at present includes the framework's direction and applicable entities; specific regulatory conditions, asset scope, implementation timeline, and accompanying requirements have not yet been disclosed. Going forward, attention should focus on whether the SEC further clarifies rule details and how the framework interfaces with existing crypto asset custody requirements.
From an industry perspective, self-custody of private keys involves asset control rights, security management, and compliance responsibilities. If regulated funds can self-custody crypto private keys, their custody models and related internal control arrangements may both change. However, the source material provides no further operational details, so at present only the regulatory framework's direction can be confirmed; the actual implementation pace cannot yet be assessed. For regulated funds, the key question is how to manage private keys under compliance requirements, and how regulators will verify custody security. These issues will determine the new framework's actual impact on how funds hold crypto assets.
EU MiCA Stablecoin Rules: Low Compliance Rate Sparks Calls for Amendment
On stablecoin regulation, Circle is calling on the EU to amend its MiCA stablecoin rules. According to the source material, only 3 of the world's top 30 stablecoins are compliant. The low MiCA compliance rate will affect global stablecoin issuers. Circle's call indicates a clear gap between current MiCA rules and the existing stablecoin market landscape. Since only 3 of the top 30 global stablecoins meet the requirements, most stablecoin issuers may face compliance adjustment pressure or need to reassess their strategies in the EU market.
The source material does not currently disclose Circle's specific proposed amendments, nor whether the EU has responded. What is confirmable is that MiCA stablecoin rules have become a significant factor affecting global stablecoin issuers, and the low compliance count makes this issue more urgent. Stablecoin issuers need to monitor compliance determination standards and related operational arrangements, but specific rule details remain subject to subsequent regulatory documents. For the market, how the EU's MiCA framework is adjusted will directly affect stablecoin access and operating conditions in the European market.
Regulatory Link: Custody and Stablecoins Both Infrastructure Issues
The SEC custody framework and EU MiCA stablecoin rules are independent regulatory developments in different jurisdictions, but both involve crypto market infrastructure. The SEC framework focuses on how regulated funds hold crypto assets and private key control, while MiCA rules focus on stablecoin issuance and compliance. Together, they reflect that regulators are developing standards around key aspects of crypto assets: first, asset custody and control rights; second, stablecoin issuance and compliance. For industry participants, custody rules affect funds and custodians, while stablecoin rules affect issuers. Although the two developments are not the same event, both fall under the broader theme of crypto regulatory framework adjustments.
Based on currently confirmable information, the SEC framework has a clear direction—certain regulated funds may self-custody crypto private keys; on MiCA, there is clear data—only 3 of the top 30 global stablecoins are compliant—and Circle's public call for rule changes. These two regulatory developments are representative in terms of factual direction and industry impact. Key areas to watch going forward include: the SEC's new custody framework's scope of application, regulatory conditions, and implementation timeline; whether and how EU MiCA stablecoin rules will be amended; compliance pathways for global stablecoin issuers; and changes in crypto asset custody arrangements for regulated funds. These developments will collectively shape the regulatory environment for crypto asset custody and the stablecoin market.
Follow-Up Focus: Rule Details and Compliance Pathways Remain Key
Currently, both the SEC's new custody framework and Circle's call on MiCA are in progress. For the SEC framework, the market needs to watch whether it covers more types of regulated funds, whether additional private key management requirements are imposed, and whether it forms a substitute or supplement to existing custody rules. For MiCA, the market needs to watch whether the EU responds to Circle's amendment call, whether the current situation of only 3 of the top 30 global stablecoins being compliant prompts rule adjustments, and what approaches stablecoin issuers will take to meet compliance requirements. As the source material provides no further timeline or decision outcomes, what can be confirmed at this stage is that both regulatory issues are advancing and have potential implications for fund custody and stablecoin issuance.