The SEC’s September 2026 innovation exemption requires eligible stock tokens to preserve the rights attached to the underlying shares. How those rights reach investors through tokenization arrangements remains contested. Tokenized stock ownership depends on the legal entitlement and the parties responsible for delivering it.
In BFRR’s October news review, co-hosts Dr. Michael Blaschke and Stefan Grasmann examine that problem as financial institutions and crypto platforms move into each other’s markets. Their discussion connects the US debate over third-party stock tokenization with Europe’s work on settlement infrastructure and collateral.
What the SEC requires of tokenized stock ownership
The exemption, issued on 17 September, temporarily allows qualifying venues to use automated market makers and liquidity pools for tokenized US stocks. Participants trade against assets committed to those pools, with smart contracts governing the mechanism. The trading arrangements are permissioned, even though the contracts are deployed on public, permissionless ledgers. A public blockchain therefore does not imply unrestricted access to the venue.
Venues must verify that eligible tokens carry equivalent shareholder entitlements, including dividends, voting rights and a share of residual assets in liquidation. Synthetic instruments that merely provide exposure to an underlying stock are outside the order’s definition of eligible tokenized stock. A token’s price behavior alone does not establish which type of claim its holder has.
Where an unaffiliated third party tokenizes a stock, the venue must notify the issuer and allow 30 calendar days for an objection. This issuer process is separate from the venue’s public notice before launch. The SEC also cautions that inclusion on its list of venue notifications does not establish compliance with the exemption. A filing and an operational trading service are different milestones.
Shareholder rights need an operating model
SIFMA’s 19 October letter asks how ownership information will reach issuers and transfer agents, how corporate actions will work and whether tokens can move outside the venue ecosystem. The trade association also seeks changes to issuer consent, including a longer objection period. Those recommendations are industry proposals; they do not alter the existing order.
For tokens held in a liquidity pool, someone must determine who exercises voting rights and receives distributions. A stock split requires token quantities and pool balances to adjust to the changed share count. SIFMA asks who performs these tasks and what recourse investors have if a venue fails to pass on a payment. SIFMA also notes that the order does not require redemption of a token for its underlying share. A holder could face a venue trading halt without that alternative route to exit.
Grasmann uses the distinction between issuer-sponsored and third-party tokenization to question what investors actually own. Blaschke connects it to the identity of the party against which a holder has a claim. The resulting implication is that an auditable transfer history can document the movement of a token while leaving performance of the associated obligations dependent on intermediaries.
That dependency also limits comparisons between products marketed as tokenized stocks. A claim structured to deliver shareholder rights and an instrument offering synthetic price exposure can have similar market prices while giving holders different recourse. The SEC’s eligibility boundary makes that distinction consequential for venues seeking to use this exemption.
Europe’s settlement infrastructure faces the default test
Boerse Stuttgart Group announced its DLT trading and settlement system license on 20 October, providing the regulatory basis for Seturion as a pan-European digital settlement platform. The group says the platform is intended to connect banks, brokers and trading venues across Europe. The authorization establishes a regulatory foundation; transaction volumes and operational adoption require separate evidence.
This infrastructure work meets a harder test in collateral. ESMA’s 9 October call for evidence asks whether tokenized assets can be used safely by central counterparties, which manage obligations between clearing members. It covers assets mirrored from traditional systems and assets issued directly on distributed ledgers, including their interaction with tokenized cash.
For a central counterparty, usable collateral must remain legally enforceable and accessible when a clearing member defaults. ESMA is examining whether the assets can then be transferred and converted into liquidity, alongside questions of segregation, client protection and settlement finality. The consultation, open until 15 January 2027, seeks evidence about those conditions. It does not itself authorize a new class of collateral.
The connection to stock ownership is practical: normal transfers reveal only part of the arrangement. The more demanding test comes when an intermediary fails or a corporate action changes what the holder is owed. For tokenized assets to serve as dependable collateral, the legal entitlement and the ability to obtain or liquidate the asset must survive the same disruption.
Bitcoin, Fiat & Rock’n’Roll Telegram Channel
Knowledge Bite Michael: Financial Times opinion piece in “On Wall Street” column titled “The ledger problem”
Value4Value Podcast Streaming: Support our podcast by listening to our episodes on the Fountain Podcast App. This way, if you wish, you can support us „Value4Value“ while listening to the podcast. You can find us on the Fountain Podcast App here: Click here
Disclaimer: The content of this podcast reflects the private opinions of the hosts, serves exclusively for general information purposes and does not constitute investment advice. Always remember: Do your own research—inform yourself before making any investment decisions, such as buying Bitcoin. First try to understand what Bitcoin is and how to store it. This podcast does not provide financial advice. Note that the co-hosts might be invested in crypto assets. Read more on our website: Click here
—
All links marked with „*“ are affiliate links. If you use these links for purchase, the podcast receives a small share of the revenue without any additional costs to you. On the contrary, affiliate links often include discount promotions, so you can even save money. We would appreciate it if you use these links to support us. Thank you very much!