Fidelity Digital Asset Services has filed multiple formal submissions to the SEC’s Crypto Task Force in 2025, pressing regulators to define how on-chain settlement of securities fits within existing U.S. clearing and settlement law. The push marks one of the most direct institutional demands for blockchain-specific regulatory guidance the Commission has received under Chair Paul Atkins.
Fidelity’s Formal Ask: What the SEC Crypto Task Force Received
Fidelity’s institutional crypto arm, Fidelity Digital Asset Services, submitted a written memo to the SEC Crypto Task Force on May 6, 2025. The filing specifically requested regulatory clarity on how blockchain-based settlement of securities interacts with current U.S. clearing and settlement rules.
That was not a one-off. Fidelity Investments followed up with a second written submission on July 2, 2025, reinforcing the same core ask. Two filings from the same parent organization within two months signals sustained institutional pressure, not a courtesy comment.
The specific request centers on on-chain settlement, not broader crypto regulation. Fidelity wants to know whether finalizing securities trades directly on a blockchain satisfies existing legal obligations, or whether it triggers an entirely different set of compliance requirements. That distinction matters for every broker-dealer and custodian considering tokenized assets, similar to how recent SEC and CFTC efforts to build a crypto taxonomy have attempted to draw clearer lines around digital asset classification.
Why On-Chain Settlement Clarity Is a Threshold Issue
On-chain settlement means finalizing securities trades directly on a blockchain instead of routing them through traditional clearinghouses like the DTCC, which currently operates on a T+1 settlement cycle. The technology exists. The legal framework does not clearly accommodate it.
The core problem: current SEC rules, including Rule 15c6-1 governing settlement timing, were written before blockchain existed. Without explicit guidance, broker-dealers cannot confirm whether on-chain finality satisfies T+1 requirements or creates new, potentially conflicting obligations. That ambiguity blocks institutional adoption.
SEC Chair Paul Atkins signaled the Commission is actively examining this space. He hosted a tokenization roundtable on May 12, 2025, bringing together industry participants and regulators to discuss how tokenized assets should be treated under securities law.
This is not just a Fidelity problem. Every institution exploring tokenized Treasuries, on-chain equity settlement, or institutional DeFi participation faces the same legal uncertainty. The regulatory gap affects the entire pipeline from issuance to custody to final settlement, and the stakes extend well beyond any single firm. The broader volatility in crypto markets only heightens institutional demand for regulatory certainty before committing capital to on-chain infrastructure.
SEC Crypto Task Force: Atkins’ New Regulatory Direction
The SEC Crypto Task Force is a formal Commission body, not an informal working group. It was created after Chair Paul Atkins replaced Gary Gensler, representing a deliberate shift from an enforcement-first posture to a framework-building approach.
Under Atkins, the Task Force has solicited structured industry input through written submissions and public roundtables covering custody, broker-dealer rules, and tokenization. Fidelity’s filings are part of that formal engagement process, which gives them procedural weight beyond a standard comment letter.
Multiple firms have participated in this process throughout 2025. Coverage from TradersUnion noted that Fidelity has urged the SEC to accelerate its timeline, reflecting broader industry impatience with the pace of regulatory development. The shift under Atkins has opened a window for institutional influence that did not exist under the prior administration’s approach, which leaned heavily on enforcement actions rather than proactive rulemaking.
Jones Day, in a December 2025 analysis, noted that the SEC’s crypto-related statements throughout the year have been aimed at regulatory clarity. That legal commentary suggests the Commission’s direction is being read as a genuine shift, not just a rhetorical one. For context, the evolving regulatory landscape has also prompted responses across DeFi, as seen when protocols moved quickly to clarify their standing after security incidents.
What Comes Next for On-Chain Settlement Rules
No formal rulemaking on on-chain settlement has been announced as of mid-2025. The Task Force is still in input-gathering mode, with roundtables and written submissions forming the evidentiary base for any future guidance or proposed rules.
Fidelity filing twice in one year, through both its digital asset subsidiary and its parent investment arm, suggests the company views this as urgent. Dual filings from separate corporate entities within the same organization are a lobbying escalation, not a procedural formality.
A positive SEC response could unlock several institutional use cases: tokenized U.S. Treasuries settling on-chain, equity transactions bypassing traditional clearinghouse infrastructure, and regulated participation in DeFi protocols. Each of these requires settlement finality to have a clear legal definition under securities law.
The next concrete milestones are the Task Force’s upcoming roundtables and any guidance documents that emerge from the 2025 input cycle. Fidelity and other institutional participants have laid the groundwork. Whether the SEC converts that input into actionable rules will determine how quickly on-chain settlement moves from pilot programs to production infrastructure.
Disclaimer: This article is for informational purposes only and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Cryptocurrency and digital asset markets carry significant risk. Always do your own research before making decisions.
