Connect with us

Uncategorized

Sandboxes Are a Way Out of the Regulatory Sandstorm

Published

on

Regulation by enforcement is beginning to crumble, with a court recently ruling that the SEC’s refusal to issue a crypto rule was unlawful. A new crypto-friendly administration stands ready to create crypto clarity through new appointments at the SEC and the CFTC.

New acting CFTC Chair Caroline Pham has proposed an uncommon approach, namely the regulatory sandbox.

A regulatory sandbox is a waiver of regulations but in a supervised environment. Projects can test innovative ideas outside rigid regulatory frameworks. Federal digital asset sandboxes may come sooner than you think, but current state sandbox models fall short in the digital assets context, with extremely limited scopes and durations.

We propose a “Sustainable Sandbox” and develop Pham’s idea, along with similar proposals from SEC Commissioner Peirce, and various initiatives in states and the Federal Reserve.

The Sustainable Sandbox will give regulators enough time and information to draft thoughtful and sensible rules governing digital assets. Without such a stopgap, the digital assets industry would end up in the same place–trying to work with rules that do not make sense.

How sandboxes work

At its core, a regulatory sandbox allows businesses to conduct live experiments with innovative technologies while regulators observe and gather data. Businesses apply for waivers from certain laws that may technically apply to their activities but do not align with the unique nature of their innovations.

For example, a decentralized finance (DeFi) platform might be exempted from securities regulations that were designed for traditional financial intermediaries. This exemption provides the freedom to innovate without being hamstrung by outdated rules.

Importantly, regulatory sandboxes do not equate to a regulatory free-for-all. Participants must adhere to baseline standards for consumer protection and financial stability, ensuring that accountability is not sacrificed in the name of innovation.

In practice, regulatory sandboxes have proven to be valuable tools for identifying outdated regulations. By generating real-world data, they enable lawmakers to assess whether certain rules should be reformed or repealed. Without such mechanisms, unnecessary or impractical regulations risk stifling progress and innovation.

Lessons from the U.K. and beyond

The U.K. has been a pioneer in implementing regulatory sandboxes. The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) introduced its sandbox in 2016, offering a structured environment for businesses to test new ideas. Participants have ranged from large law firms to cryptocurrency projects, reflecting the sandbox’s inclusivity and flexibility.

In terms of digital assets innovation, the U.K.’s success can be attributed to its focus on fostering both collaboration and innovation. By allowing businesses to experiment within a regulated framework, the sandbox has attracted a diverse array of participants and provided critical insights into how emerging technologies interact with existing laws.

Other regions, such as Singapore and the UAE, have also embraced sandboxes as tools for driving innovation. Singapore’s Monetary Authority (MAS) has used its sandbox to advance tokenization in financial services, while the UAE has leveraged its framework to attract blockchain startups. These examples highlight the potential of sandboxes to position countries as global leaders in the digital asset space.

Challenges facing regulatory sandboxes

Despite their benefits, the existing regulatory sandboxes face several limitations:

Narrow scope: Most sandboxes are restricted to specific industries or activities, limiting their applicability to broader regulatory challenges. Participants must also apply and be accepted, so not all projects are treated equally.

Short duration: Sandboxes often have fixed timelines, requiring businesses to exit the program without long-term regulatory clarity.

High costs: Participating in a sandbox can be resource-intensive for both businesses and regulators, deterring smaller players from applying.

To address these challenges, we propose the «Sustainable Sandbox» – a redesigned framework tailored to the unique needs of the crypto industry.

Designing the ‘sustainable sandbox’

The «Sustainable Sandbox» builds on the strengths of existing models while addressing their shortcomings. Here’s how it would work:

1. Simplified automatic enrollment

Participants that complete a form filing process will be automatically enrolled, and will not be subject to an application and acceptance process by the regulator. Businesses that don’t fit the default form, such as DAOs or decentralized exchanges, could propose their own compliance frameworks (subject to regulatory approval) aligned with broad policy goals set by regulators.

2. Data-driven decision-making

Regulators would collect and analyze data from sandbox participants to evaluate the effectiveness of waived regulations. This information could inform broader reforms, creating a feedback loop that aligns regulation with innovation, and enabling regulators to write new sensible rules.

3. Seamless transitions

At the end of the sandbox period, participants could transition to a tailored safe harbor (which SEC Commissioner Hester Peirce has long envisioned) or receive no-action letters (but remain subject to light oversight), providing long-term regulatory clarity. This ensures that businesses do not face a regulatory cliff, which could disrupt operations and deter participation.

Why now?

The need for a «Sustainable Sandbox» in the U.S. has never been greater. Innovative industries like blockchain and AI are evolving rapidly, but outdated legal frameworks threaten to stifle their potential. At the same time, many regulators lack a deep understanding of these technologies, making it difficult to craft effective rules. By setting broad policy goals and collaborating with industry stakeholders, regulators can bridge this knowledge gap and create a more adaptive legal framework.

The recent Supreme Court decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo further underscores the urgency of regulatory innovation. By removing courts’ deference to agency interpretations of their authority, the ruling shifts power toward regulated industries, emphasizing the need for more collaborative governance. The «Sustainable Sandbox» offers a path forward, balancing the needs of regulators and innovators in a rapidly changing landscape.

Final thoughts

As the crypto industry continues to grow, so does the need for regulatory frameworks that can keep pace with innovation. The «Sustainable Sandbox» provides a blueprint for balancing experimentation with accountability, fostering a collaborative environment where both regulators and businesses can thrive. By embracing this model, the U.S. has an opportunity to lead the world in crypto innovation while ensuring consumer protection and market stability.

For the full version of this article, click here.

Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Ваш адрес email не будет опубликован. Обязательные поля помечены *

Uncategorized

First Solana ETF to Hit the Market This Week; SOL Price Jumps 5%

Published

on

By

Solana SOL jumped about 5% Monday morning amid rumors that a SOL Staking exchange-trade fund (ETF) by Rex Shares and Osprey Funds could start trading on the market as soon as Wednesday.

The token later fell back slightly, now trading up about 2.3% over the past 24 hours at $157 at press time.

A spokesperson for Osprey confirmed to CoinDesk that the «fund will launch Wednesday,» following a post on X by the automated headline account «Unfolded.»

Just last week, Rex filed a letter with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) asking whether comments had been resolved for their filing. Later that day, the asset manager posted on X that the ETF was “coming soon,” suggesting that the SEC had no further comments.

The REX-Osprey SOL+Staking ETF would be the first of its kind in the U.S. Several issuers are still awaiting approval for a spot SOL ETF which would likely also include staking capabilities.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Katana Mainnet Goes Live as Pre-Deposits Hit $232M

Published

on

By

Self described ‘DeFi-first’ layer-2 blockchain Katana has launched its mainnet after receiving $232 million in pre-deposits.

Deposits flooded in after Katana was revealed to the public less than a month ago. DefiLlama data shows that deposited jumped from $75M to $2320M between June 1 and June 30.

Depositors will receive randomized reward NFTs called Krates, as well as a share of 70 million KAT tokens, Katana’s native token. Upon launch, yield farmers will be able earn more KAT by staking on platforms like Morpho and Sushi.

The blockchain aims to solve one of DeFi’s largest problems: Liquidity.

A lack of liquidity can lead to a multitude of issues including slippage, inefficient pricing and unsustainable yields.

Some of the mechanisms Katana will use to solve that the issues is VaultBridge, which is a product that enables yield generation on deposited assets on Ethereum, as well as chain-owned liquidity (CoL), which allows Katana to retain 100% of net sequencer fees and convert them into liquidity reserves.

«Katana represents the endgame for how blockchains create value in DeFi,» Marc Boiron, co-contributor of Katana said in a press release.

The launch coincides with yield farming incentives including token rewards for liquidity providers on Morpho and Sushi.

Despite being based on Ethereum, Katana is blockchain agnostic so users can generate a yield on blockchains like Solana through Katana’s collaboration with Jito, a liquid staking protocol.

UPDATE (June 30, 2025, 17:46 UTC): Updates to reflect new numbers in pre-deposits.

Continue Reading

Uncategorized

Why Are There No Big DApps on Ethereum?

Published

on

By

On July 30, 2025, we will be celebrating a decade since Ethereum launched on mainnet. Inarguably, one of the biggest milestones in this industry’s short life.

When it launched as the world’s first smart contract platform, this was obviously something entirely new and a completely new way of thinking about software. Instead of renting access to someone else’s platform that could change the rules or lock you out at any moment, one could – in theory – now participate in systems that belonged to everyone and no one, where the rules were written in code and couldn’t be arbitrarily changed by a CEO’s whim. Users would own their date, and software would be maintained and managed by a network rather than a boardroom. The consequences seemed pretty utopian.

However, nearly ten years on from Ethereum’s launch and the dreams of a Web3 version of Amazon, eBay, Facebook or TikTok haven’t arrived, and are nowhere on the horizon.

Gavin Wood, Ethereum co-founder, and his vision of “Web3” envisaged exactly that. Joe Lubin, the renowned founder of Consensys, said that “Ethereum will have that same pervasive influence on our communications and our entire information infrastructure.»

The libertarian journalist Jim Epstein predicted a year after Ethereum’s launch that “the same types of services offered by companies like Facebook, Google, eBay, and Amazon will be provided instead by computers distributed around the globe.”

Vitalik Buterin himself envisaged Ethereum “law, cloud storage, prediction markets, trading decentralized hosting, [hosting] your own currency,” in his 2014 Bitcoin Miami speech, where he announced Ethereum to the world. “Perhaps even Skynet,” the fictional artificial neural network from the Terminator films. He has described the platform he created as both a threat and an opportunity to platforms like Facebook and Twitter back in 2021.

The Scale Problem

The barrier to achieving this vision is scale. The most successful consumer applications today serve hundreds of millions of users. Instagram processes more than 1 billion photo uploads daily. eBay handles roughly 17 billion dollars in transactions each quarter. Facebook’s messaging platforms process trillions of messages annually.

Ethereum processes about 14 transactions per second, and Solana can handle over 1000. Instagram handles over 1 billion photo uploads daily. eBay processes 17 billion dollars in transactions quarterly. The math doesn’t work.

Let’s entertain the decentralized eBay example for a moment. A truly decentralized eBay would demand far more than simple payments. Every listing creation or update would require onchain transactions for item metadata, pricing, and condition details. Auctions would need automatic bidding resolution with time-locked smart contracts. Escrow systems would have to hold funds until delivery confirmation, with DAO arbitration for disputes.

User reputation systems would require immutable rating storage tied to wallet addresses. Inventory management would need real-time stock tracking, possibly through tokenized goods. Shipping confirmations would demand oracle integration for delivery proofs. Marketplace fees and tax royalties would need smart contract enforcement. Optional identity verification systems would require decentralized credential management. Each interaction would multiply the transaction load exponentially beyond what current infrastructure could support.

It goes without saying that this would require a blockchain of unprecedented speed and throughput. Frankly, a decade after Ethereum, the infrastructure just hasn’t been there to support it.

The Economics Don’t Work

The business model hasn’t always made sense either. Modern applications need massive scale to generate revenue that covers development costs. Furthermore, layer 2 solutions fragment users across platforms, where (for example) Arbitrum users can’t directly interact with Polygon applications. This defeats the purpose of building unified global computing.

This isn’t theoretical. OpenSea struggled with profitability despite dominating NFT trading with high-value transactions & fee-tolerant users. If you can’t profit from selling digital art to crypto enthusiasts paying hundreds in fees, how do you build a marketplace for used goods? The economics are even worse for lower-value transactions that define mainstream commerce. A decentralized social network charging $5 per post would be dead on arrival.

Gaming applications that require a few dollars in transaction fees for every item trade won’t attract players who expect the same for free elsewhere. So far, the only viable on-chain businesses have been those that can extract massive value from relatively few users – essentially high-stakes financial applications and speculative trading.

The Calvary Is Coming

The industry accepted a false tradeoff: security and decentralization, or functionality and scale, but not both. But transaction throughput has steadily increased (and will continue to) across networks as the technology matures. We can now achieve massive scale even with proof of work chains, maintaining the security and decentralization that made blockchain revolutionary in the first place (rather than the premature embrace of proof of stake that compromised these principles).

Zero-knowledge proofs allow users to prove transaction validity locally, submitting only small cryptographic proofs that are aggregated recursively and in parallel by a network of provers. Networks can process millions of transactions without every node verifying each one individually. When users prove their own transactions, the marginal cost of adding an additional transaction approaches zero, and blockchains can finally support the economics that mainstream applications require.

But ten years on, it’s clear that the vision once laid out by the futurists of Web3 has moved at a disappointing pace. Let’s hope the next decade moves a little faster – and, fingers crossed – our blockchains too.

Continue Reading

Trending

Copyright © 2017 Zox News Theme. Theme by MVP Themes, powered by WordPress.