SEC Chairman Atkins Says CLARITY Act Needed to "Future-Proof" Crypto Policy

Crypto Push Won’t Last Without Congress, SEC’s Atkins Says

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins said Monday that the agency has limited ability to ensure the Trump administration’s push to accelerate cryptocurrency development will endure beyond his term without market structure legislation from Congress.

“Nothing future-proofs things like a statute,” Atkins said during an appearance at the Bitcoin 2026 conference in Las Vegas, adding that “good opinions from courts” also help.

The chair said the SEC has room to be nimble and act under the securities laws but that the commission is ultimately bound by its existing authority, which is “basically a 1930s-type thing.”

Atkins, as well as Commodity Futures Trading Commission Chair Michael Selig, has made bringing regulatory clarity to the crypto industry a central focus of his tenure, issuing numerous staff interpretations aimed at providing greater certainty.

The SEC’s New SOX Group – Potential Impacts for Audit Firms, Their Professionals, and Future PCAOB Enforcement

We expect the new SOX group to increase SEC enforcement focus on auditors and public issuers. Under current SEC leadership, that focus may fall more principally on the worst of the profession, and not on the largest, most sophisticated audit firms or on the types of more technical cases, including sweeps, more recently brought by the PCAOB. Under future SEC leadership with different priorities, however, the SOX group could expand its mandate and substantially escalate enforcement efforts against auditors.

We also expect that the new group will assume much of the PCAOB enforcement’s duties but will not entirely displace the PCAOB’s enforcement program. As part of its mandate under the Act, the PCAOB will likely continue with certain enforcement priorities, including investigations of foreign firms and auditors that participate in audits of US filers, as well as non-compliance with the PCAOB’s inspections program.

A significant shift from PCAOB enforcement to SEC enforcement likely will have certain benefits for auditors, including a focus on more clearcut, egregious conduct rather than more technical violations. Such a shift also could have potentially negative consequences for auditors, however, including losing the confidentiality afforded to PCAOB investigations, public disclosure of enforcement proceedings, and fewer opportunities to appeal negative findings.

The California Wealth Tax Advances

Progressives are testing how much ruin there is in California. On Sunday they said they’ve gathered enough signatures to place a wealth tax referendum on the November ballot, even as a new study shows it is likely to result in less state revenue.

The proposed ballot measure would impose a (supposedly) one-time 5% tax on individuals with more than $1 billion in wealth. The tax would hit nearly all of a billionaire’s assets including trusts, as well as voting interests in a company if that exceeds his equity stake. It applies to billionaires who were California “residents” as of Jan. 1 this year.

Billionaires are already leaving the state. California Tax Foundation visiting fellow Jared Walczak estimates in a new paper that “reported departures already total $777 billion,” and more “‘quiet departures’” that do not draw media coverage” are likely this year since “there are solid legal reasons to believe that the initiative’s residency date and approach could be challenged successfully in court.”

By his estimate, the wealth tax exodus could total $1.23 trillion and reduce annual state tax revenue by $3.53 billion to $4.49 billion, mainly from lower income-tax collections. He calculates that “the net present value of these ongoing losses outstrips the one-time revenue projected by the initiative’s proponents effects.” That means the tax will over time cost the state more revenue than it raises because of out-migration and slower economic growth.

Everything Is Commodities Fraud

Also, though: Is it a simple insider trading case? What did he insider trade? He was charged with a number of crimes, including “unlawful use of confidential government information for personal gain,” which seems right. But he was also charged — criminally and by the CFTC — with commodities fraud, that is, insider trading in the commodities market. Why is “Maduro Out by January 31, 2026” a commodity?