For years, investment advisers navigating the digital asset landscape have faced a quiet but consequential constraint: when no qualified custodian exists for a given crypto token, the path to offering it to clients effectively closes. The SEC's new proposal acknowledges this structural gap, offering a conditional framework that permits advisers to hold certain crypto assets directly — not as a relaxation of oversight, but as a pragmatic recognition that rules written for a different era cannot govern a multi-trillion-dollar market that has outgrown them. The move reflects a broader tension reg
SEC Proposes Conditional Self-Custody Rules to Unlock Crypto Adviser Access
Advisers caught between waiting for rules and complying with reality
Mark
Why does it matter whether an adviser can hold crypto directly? Isn't that what custodians are for?
Mimi
It matters because custodians don't exist yet for every token. If a client wants exposure to a newer or less-established digital asset, there may be no qualified custodian available to hold it. So advisers either say no to the client, or they delay the investment until custody catches up.
Mark
And the SEC is now saying advisers can just hold it themselves?
Mimi
Only under conditions. They have to prove no custodian is available. They have to reassess that every quarter. And if a custodian does become available, they have to move the assets over.
Luke
But how does an adviser prove "no custodian is available"? That's a factual claim that could be disputed. And what counts as "as soon as reasonably practicable"? Those phrases are going to generate a lot of interpretation during the comment period.
Mimi
True. The SEC will need to clarify what documentation advisers have to maintain, and what effort they need to show they made to find a custodian.
Mark
What about the security side? If an adviser is holding client crypto, what stops them from losing it or misusing it?
Mimi
The proposal requires private-key controls, cybersecurity standards, and segregation of each client's holdings. And any transfer has to be approved by at least two people.
Luke
That's a control on transfers, but it doesn't prevent an adviser from simply holding the assets poorly. Cybersecurity requirements are vague. What does "reasonable" safeguarding actually mean? And who audits whether the adviser is meeting these standards?
Mimi
The SEC didn't specify that in the proposal itself. That's part of what the comment period is for.
Mark
So this is really about unlocking access to tokens that don't have custodians yet?
Mimi
Yes. And also about state trust companies becoming custodians themselves, which could expand the pool of available custodians over time.
Luke
But state trust companies are regulated at the state level, not federal. The SEC is saying they can be custodians if they meet certain standards, but enforcement and oversight could be fragmented.
Mimi
That's a real tension. The SEC is trying to expand options without losing control of the framework.
Le Pouls
- Investment advisers have quietly been declining token allocations or delaying client access to digital assets simply because no approved custodian exists — a bottleneck the SEC's proposal now directly targets.
- The Digital Chamber flagged this exact problem in a May 2025 filing, arguing that custody gaps were forcing advisers to leave assets temporarily in the hands of portfolio companies — an arrangement that satisfied no one.
- Self-custody is permitted under the proposal, but hedged with conditions: quarterly reassessment, cybersecurity controls, segregated client holdings, and a mandatory two-person approval for any transfer of assets.
- A second pathway opens for state trust companies, which could qualify as crypto custodians if they meet authorization, safeguarding, and auditing standards — potentially expanding capacity at the token level.
- A 60-day public comment period will determine how firms document custodian unavailability, implement quarterly reviews, and whether the new pathways can realistically close the gaps that have constrained allocations.
For years, investment advisers navigating the digital asset landscape have faced a quiet but consequential constraint: when no qualified custodian exists for a given crypto token, the path to offering it to clients effectively closes. The SEC's new proposal acknowledges this structural gap, offering a conditional framework that permits advisers to hold certain crypto assets directly — not as a relaxation of oversight, but as a pragmatic recognition that rules written for a different era cannot govern a multi-trillion-dollar market that has outgrown them. The move reflects a broader tension regulators everywhere must eventually confront: how to maintain accountability without allowing the machinery of compliance to become the obstacle itself.
The SEC moved Thursday to address one of crypto's most persistent operational frustrations: investment advisers have long been unable to offer clients exposure to certain digital assets simply because no qualified custodian exists to hold them. The agency's proposal would allow advisers to self-custody specific crypto assets — but only as a last resort, and only under a layered set of conditions designed to prevent that exception from becoming a loophole.
SEC Chair Paul Atkins framed the proposal as a necessary adjustment to rules that have not kept pace with a market now measured in the trillions. The practical consequences of the old framework were real: advisers reduced allocations, delayed offerings, or left assets in the hands of token issuers while waiting for custodial infrastructure to catch up. The Digital Chamber raised this concern formally in 2025, and the SEC's proposal is, in effect, its answer.
Under the new framework, self-custody is permitted only after an adviser demonstrates that no qualified custodian is available for a specific asset — a determination that must be revisited every quarter. The moment a custodian becomes available, transfer is expected promptly. Safeguards include cybersecurity standards for private key storage, segregation of each client's holdings, and a two-person approval requirement for any asset transfer. Commissioner Mark Uyeda noted that fiduciary duties remain intact, keeping legal accountability with the adviser rather than diffusing it.
The proposal also opens a second pathway: state trust companies could qualify as crypto custodians if they meet authorization, safeguarding, and auditing requirements. Regulated investment funds could participate in self-custody arrangements if their adviser qualifies and the fund's board provides oversight.
Commissioner Hester Peirce described the custody landscape as a regulatory roller coaster — advisers caught between rules that don't fit the market and a market that can't wait for rules to catch up. The 60-day comment period that follows Federal Register publication will test whether the framework is workable in practice, particularly around documentation requirements and the pace at which the state trust company pathway can expand capacity. The proposal is not yet final, but its direction is clear: the SEC is choosing conditional access over continued paralysis.
The Securities and Exchange Commission took a step Thursday toward untangling one of crypto's most stubborn operational problems: investment advisers cannot easily offer clients exposure to digital assets when no qualified custodian exists to hold them. The agency's proposal would allow advisers to hold certain crypto assets directly, but only under strict conditions and only when they have exhausted other options.
SEC Chair Paul Atkins framed the move as a necessary catch-up. The crypto market has grown into a multi-trillion-dollar asset class, he said, but the rules governing how advisers can access it have not evolved to match. The practical result has been a bottleneck. When a token lacks an approved custody pathway, advisers sometimes reduce their allocations to that asset, delay offering it to clients, or ask the companies behind those tokens to keep the assets in their own hands until custodial support materializes. In May 2025, the Digital Chamber raised this exact concern in a filing to the SEC, arguing that custody limitations have forced advisers to decline token allocations or hold assets temporarily at portfolio companies. The SEC's proposal is, in effect, a response to that gap—a shift from a rigid "only eligible custodians can hold it" rule toward a conditional framework that acknowledges market realities.
Under the new framework, an adviser could hold clients' crypto assets directly, but only after demonstrating that no permitted custodian is available for that specific asset. The determination would need to be reassessed every quarter. The moment a qualified custodian becomes available, the adviser would be expected to transfer the assets to that custodian as soon as reasonably practicable. The SEC built in guardrails to prevent self-custody from becoming a convenient default. Private keys would need to be secured according to cybersecurity standards. Each client's holdings would be kept separate. And critically, at least two authorized individuals would need to approve any transfer of self-custodied assets—an internal control designed to prevent a single person from moving client funds unilaterally. SEC Commissioner Mark Uyeda acknowledged that advisers holding crypto for clients creates an inherent conflict of interest, but emphasized that advisers' fiduciary duties would remain in place, keeping legal responsibility intact rather than outsourcing the risk.
The proposal extends beyond individual advisers. Regulated investment funds could also maintain crypto assets in self-custody if their investment adviser meets the self-custody requirements and the fund's board oversees the arrangement. The SEC also introduced a second pathway: state trust companies could serve as crypto custodians if they are authorized by their state to provide custody services, maintain reasonable safeguarding procedures, segregate client holdings from their own assets, and provide audited financial statements and internal control reports.
SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce described the custody question as a regulatory "roller coaster," noting that advisers have been caught between waiting for workable rules and trying to comply with requirements that may not align with how the market actually operates. The proposal attempts to resolve that tension by creating conditional exceptions rather than eliminating oversight entirely.
The SEC is accepting public comments for 60 days after the proposal appears in the Federal Register. The comment period will likely surface how firms plan to implement the quarterly reassessment requirement, what documentation they will need to maintain to prove no custodian is available, and whether the state trust company pathway can expand custody capacity quickly enough to address the token-level gaps that have constrained allocations. The proposal is not final, and significant operational questions remain unresolved—particularly for advisers managing multiple clients across a wide range of crypto exposures. What is clear is that the SEC is attempting to unlock product availability without abandoning the need for oversight, working within its existing authority rather than waiting for Congress to act.
Citations marquantes
The crypto market has grown into a multi-trillion-dollar asset class, but existing rules have not kept pace with how investors seek access to it.— SEC Chair Paul Atkins
Advisers have been waiting for workable custody rules while trying to comply with requirements that may not align with market realities.— SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce
Envie de l'histoire complète ?
Lire l'original sur Crypto Breaking News ↗