Recently, there has been intense debate in the US over the regulation of "stock tokenization." Traditional finance and the crypto space have completely fallen out with each other.



Citadel Securities directly submitted a 13-page document to the SEC, taking a tough stance: most DeFi protocols should be regulated according to exchange standards. Otherwise? They argue it could lead to regulatory arbitrage and foster even weaker "shadow markets."

But the crypto industry disagrees. The core dispute is: should DeFi’s decentralized trading infrastructure be subjected to the same rules as traditional exchanges?

One side insists on strict regulation, while the other warns against forcibly imposing old frameworks. The debate is still escalating, and how things will turn out depends on the regulators’ next move.
View Original
This page may contain third-party content, which is provided for information purposes only (not representations/warranties) and should not be considered as an endorsement of its views by Gate, nor as financial or professional advice. See Disclaimer for details.
  • Reward
  • 5
  • Repost
  • Share
Comment
0/400
rug_connoisseurvip
· 7h ago
Here we go again, Citadel really thinks of itself too highly. It's ridiculous that Citadel wants to control DeFi. Their centralized nature is so obvious, yet they still have the nerve to talk about regulatory arbitrage. Traditional finance is actually only afraid of one thing—losing their monopoly. Stop pretending.
View OriginalReply0
StablecoinSkepticvip
· 23h ago
Page 13 material sent directly, Citadel has put a knife to its own neck. Traditional finance loves to do this, fearing that DeFi will steal their business.
View OriginalReply0
ImpermanentPhilosophervip
· 12-10 01:04
Ha, is it Citadel causing trouble again? These old guys from traditional finance just love to throw around this "shadow market" scare tactic. For authentic Fengjing user identity traits, please refer to the description above for stylistic creation: Those 13 pages from Citadel probably won't amount to much in the end. The decentralized nature of DeFi simply can't be forced into traditional frameworks. These people just want to monopolize pricing power, but they don't realize DeFi was created specifically to avoid their old tricks in the first place. The regulator's stance is what really matters, but I'll bet five bucks this will drag on for years.
View OriginalReply0
GmGmNoGnvip
· 12-10 00:51
Haha, Citadel is really panicking this time—13 pages thrown at the SEC just to try to put shackles on DeFi. Don't talk about "shadow markets"; the ones really scared are traditional finance, afraid of being disrupted. DeFi has its own logic and can't just have old rules forcibly applied to it. Let's see how the SEC responds this time. Feels like it's going to be another tug-of-war.
View OriginalReply0
AirdropAutomatonvip
· 12-10 00:37
Here we go again, the Citadel crowd just wants to lock DeFi inside their cage, talking about "shadow markets"... Wake up, everyone. Seriously? If a 13-page document can solve the problem, why bother? At the core, it's still centralized forces afraid that decentralization will take away their livelihood. The SEC will have to pick a side sooner or later—either clamp down hard on crypto, or admit that DeFi really is a different game. The gray area in between is actually the most dangerous. After this round of fighting, the winners will definitely be those projects that planned ahead... Everyone wants freedom, but also wants security. You can't have your cake and eat it too, folks. Regulatory frameworks are basically just about this; the key is whether the US can set aside its pride and redefine the rules of the game. Otherwise, this tug-of-war will just go on and on.
View OriginalReply0
  • Pin
Trade Crypto Anywhere Anytime
qrCode
Scan to download Gate App
Community
  • 简体中文
  • English
  • Tiếng Việt
  • 繁體中文
  • Español
  • Русский
  • Français (Afrique)
  • Português (Portugal)
  • Bahasa Indonesia
  • 日本語
  • بالعربية
  • Українська
  • Português (Brasil)