Who’s Really Steering U.S. Crypto Policy? The SEC–CFTC “Harmonization” Plan, the New CFTC Chair, and the Coming Innovation Exemption

By: Moish E. Peltz, Esq. and Kyle M. Lawrence, Esq.

When SEC Chair Paul Atkins and Acting CFTC Chair Caroline Pham issued their joint statement on “regulatory harmonization,” it marked one of the clearest signs yet that Washington is trying to move toward a unified U.S. framework for digital assets. 

On Block & Order, hosts Kyle Lawrence and Moish Peltz emphasized that the statement wasn’t simply messaging. Even during the government shutdown, when agencies were running below full staffing, the SEC and CFTC announced they were prepared to begin reviewing filings for new crypto products. That eagerness to move forward suggests a transition from talking about cooperation to executing on it.

What “Staff Readiness” Actually Signals

By indicating that staff were ready to review filings, the agencies were telegraphing a shift inside the bureaucracy: the CFTC and SEC were preparing to accept new filings, to evaluate them jointly, and to align their internal processes more closely than they have in years. 

In practice, that means the early groundwork for harmonized oversight has already begun. This is notable because regulatory harmonization in digital assets is rarely as simple as issuing a joint press release. It also requires aligning definitions, expectations, risk frameworks, and enforcement priorities, all of which must be reconciled between two agencies with different mandates and cultures.

A Leaderless CFTC Raised Structural Concerns 

When Moish and Kyle talked about this in Episode 43, one issue loomed large: the CFTC still lacked a confirmed chair. As Moish put it, “you have effectively a leaderless organization,” which created uncertainty about whether the agency could meaningfully coordinate with the SEC on crypto policy. Kyle also pointed to the imbalance in staff size between agencies, and questioned how a smaller, chairless regulator could take the lead on digital-asset oversight when the administration had said it would.

The leadership vacuum made the harmonization effort seem tenuous. Who was setting CFTC priorities? Who would ultimately speak for the agency in joint rulemaking? And how could the SEC coordinate with a counterpart still in flux?

But in recent weeks, those questions have a clearer answer. President Trump has nominated Mike Selig, previously partner at Wilkie Farr & Gallagher and currently general counsel to the SEC Crypto Task Force, to serve as CFTC Chair. Selig has demonstrated experience working alongside Atkins, and his nomination indicates that the administration wants a chair capable of coordinating directly with the SEC on the harmonization agenda, particularly when it comes to crypto legislation. His first Senate hearing was on November 19th, 2025 and he is expected to be confirmed before the end of the year. 

The Innovation Exemption: The SEC’s Next Major Policy Move

Episode 45 highlighted another milestone: Atkins’ plan to introduce an “innovation exemption,” potentially formalized by late 2025 or early 2026. Shutdown delays slowed early work, but now that the government has reopened, both the SEC and CFTC are expected to move forward with rulemaking as quickly as possible.

The innovation exemption is Atkins’ attempt to move crypto policy away from ad hoc enforcement and toward structured experimentation. Rather than forcing companies to choose between full securities compliance or risking penalties, the exemption would let crypto and fintech firms pilot products under conditional relief while regulators supervise in real time. On the show, the hosts noted that the exemption is intended to align with broader government efforts, including the recently passed GENIUS Act, to create federally supervised pathways for blockchain innovation.

The initiative is meant to solve the long-standing problem that U.S. policy has created: compliant innovation is expensive, risky, and often impractical. Developers have repeatedly chosen to launch offshore not to avoid regulation, but because there has been no workable way to test products onshore without triggering securities-law consequences. The exemption is meant to lower the cost of experimentation, curb the flight of projects abroad, and give regulators visibility into emerging risks.

What the final exemption framework will look like is unclear, but its basic design is becoming clearer: conditional supervisory relief, defined disclosure obligations, anti-fraud protections, and direct oversight while a longer-term digital-asset framework is developed. It is not a replacement for the securities regime, but an on-ramp meant to give innovators room to operate while regulators finish building the full structure.

A Turning Point for U.S. Digital Asset Regulation

Taken together, the harmonization statement, Selig’s nomination, and the innovation exemption represent more than a collection of discrete developments. They signal that the U.S. may finally be shifting from reactive enforcement and agency competition to a more unified, coordinated approach. 

For years, the lack of clarity around agency roles and the absence of any sanctioned experimentation channel pushed innovation offshore. Now the building blocks of a coherent framework are beginning to fall into place.

For founders, developers, and fintech operators, this moment suggests new opportunities to build onshore without sacrificing legal certainty. For attorneys, it marks a transition point in which interpreting regulatory signals is just as important as tracking formal rulemaking. Often, the earliest moves, like leadership appointments, staff-readiness statements, and early policy outlines, are the clues that shape the next several years.

Falcon Rappaport & Berkman will continue monitoring developments in the harmonization effort, the innovation exemption, and the evolving division of labor between the SEC and CFTC. If your business is preparing to engage with regulators or planning how to build within the coming framework, contact us to help chart a compliant and strategic path through the next chapter of U.S. digital-asset regulation.

DISCLAIMER: This summary is not legal advice and does not create any attorney-client relationship. This summary does not provide a definitive legal opinion for any factual situation. Before the firm can provide legal advice or opinion to any person or entity, the specific facts at issue must be reviewed by the firm. Before an attorney-client relationship is formed, the firm must have a signed engagement letter with a client setting forth the Firm’s scope and terms of representation. The information contained herein is based upon the law at the time of publication.