The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) is advancing two key developments in crypto asset regulation in parallel. The SEC has formally proposed crypto custody rules for investment advisers and regulated funds, allowing self-custody provided specific conditions are met and allowing state trust companies to provide custody services. At the same time, OKX has partnered with ICE, the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange, to seek approval to list 63 tokenized U.S. stocks under a five-year trading exemption provided by the SEC. The two developments point respectively to a compliance path for institutional capital in custody and a trading channel for tokenized securities, making them important windows for observing the evolution of the U.S. crypto regulatory framework.
Custody Rules: Conditional Self-Custody and State Trust Companies in Parallel
The crypto custody rules proposed by the SEC explicitly target two types of entities: investment advisers and regulated funds. According to disclosed information, the rules allow conditional self-custody while including state trust companies within the scope of institutions that can provide custody services. This means that the custody compliance issue that has long affected institutional participation in crypto assets is gaining a more operational institutional arrangement. The premise of 'conditional' also indicates that self-custody is not open without thresholds, and the specific requirements will still be subject to the regulator's formal requirements.
Impact of Custody Rules on Regulated Funds
For regulated funds, whether they can hold assets in compliance directly determines whether related products and management arrangements can be established. Custody arrangements sit at the core of this chain: they concern both the safekeeping of assets and whether management institutions meet fiduciary responsibilities and compliance review requirements. By including both self-custody and state trust company custody in the discussion, the SEC is in effect providing differentiated compliance paths for different types of institutions, thereby reducing the institutional friction for institutional capital entering the crypto asset sector.
Custody Industry Landscape Faces Redivision
The dual-path design may change the competitive structure of the existing custody industry. On the one hand, conditional self-custody gives institutions with the relevant capabilities an option for self-control, reducing their single reliance on external custodians; on the other hand, the inclusion of state trust companies as custody providers adds new compliant service supply to the market. The parallel existence of the two paths means that competition in custody services will extend from simple asset safekeeping to compliance capabilities, risk control standards, and institutional adaptability. Existing custody service providers need to reassess their positioning in the institutional client chain, while institutions will gain more room for comparison when choosing custody solutions.
Tokenized U.S. Stocks: 63 Underlying Stocks Seek a Five-Year Exemption Channel
Also drawing attention alongside the custody rules is the cooperation between OKX and ICE. The two parties are seeking to list 63 tokenized U.S. stocks under a five-year trading exemption from the SEC. If the application is approved, the integration of traditional securities and the crypto market will deepen further. Based on public information, the core of the application is to use the existing exemption mechanism to provide trading arrangements for traditional securities targets in tokenized form, involving 63 underlying targets, a scale with certain demonstrative significance. The matter is currently still at the stage of seeking an exemption, and whether it can ultimately be implemented depends on the approval outcome.
Industry Demonstration Effect of Tokenized Securities
The significance of tokenized U.S. stocks lies not only in the listing of a single product. If the relevant arrangements are approved, their industry demonstration effect will be reflected on two levels: first, providing a reference path for compliant trading of traditional securities assets in on-chain form; second, providing a sample for crypto trading platforms to expand product boundaries. The further integration of traditional securities and the crypto market will also impose new requirements on the coordination of trading, clearing, and custody. For other trading platforms and traditional financial institutions, the progress of this case will become an important reference point for observation.
Two Ends of the Regulatory Framework: Custody and Trading
From a structural perspective, the custody rules and the tokenized U.S. stock application correspond respectively to two core links in the entry of crypto assets into the mainstream financial system. Custody addresses how assets can be held in compliance, while the trading exemption addresses how assets can be traded in compliance. Their emergence at the same stage reflects that the regulatory framework is extending from single-point rules to both ends of asset holding and trading. For market participants, understanding the connection between these two threads is more valuable for reference than observing any single development in isolation.
Follow-Up Areas to Watch
Key areas to watch going forward include: the final scope of application and conditional restrictions of the SEC's crypto custody rules, especially the specific requirements that must be met for self-custody; the actual role and access standards of state trust companies in the custody system; whether the OKX and ICE application can be approved, and how the trading arrangements for the 63 tokenized U.S. stock targets will be implemented. In addition, whether other trading platforms and traditional financial institutions will follow with similar cooperation will also affect the pace of progress in the tokenized securities direction. The above developments are currently all at the proposal or application stage, and specific implementation will still be subject to the regulator's formal decisions.