If centralization and decentralization of a project is the major determinant of whether a coin/token would be referred as a security or a commodity, it therefore means that there will be an unending conflicts and misunderstanding between the project owners and the SEC.
Such a conflict already exists and there is a misunderstanding about what exactly classifies a project as a security, while the SEC keeps adding more tokens to the list.There have been cases[1][2][3] where a crypto project denied the label of a security which was put on it.
Does this therefore means that SEC will soon take over the cryptocurrency industry all in the name of security regulations?
Besides bitcoin and maybe a handful other cryptocurrencies all others can be labelled to be centralized technically, especually if they run a sort of coin offering to raise funds for the project. This does not mean a "take over" is likely.[1] https://cryptoslate.com/filecoin-foundation-rejects-secs-classification-of-fil-as-security/
[2] https://www.coindesk.com/policy/2023/03/06/voyager-denies-sec-claims-vgx-token-is-security-as-binance-us-decision-looms/
[3] https://cryptoslate.com/algorand-down-10-despite-foundation-claims-that-it-isnt-security/
- Jay -
