đź“… Published: May 2025
By RatEx42 Research Team
🚨 Summary
The crypto industry is once again urging the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to provide formal clarity on the regulatory treatment of staking. Despite increased dialogue between Web3 stakeholders and regulators, staking remains legally undefined in the United States — a fact that, according to RatEx42’s analysis, continues to undermine the growth of compliant DeFi infrastructure.
“In the absence of clear staking rules, developers hesitate, investors are confused, and the U.S. risks falling behind global Web3 innovation.”
— RatEx42 Governance & Risk Desk
🏛️ The Context: Industry Pushback at Solana Accelerate
At the recent Solana Accelerate Conference in New York, policy leaders from the Crypto Council for Innovation (CCI) once again emphasized the urgent need for staking guidance. CCI’s Head of Staking Policy, Allison Muehr, stated:
“We’ve had more constructive engagement with the SEC in the last four months than in the last four years — but we still have no formal position on staking.”
As Cointelegraph reports, this ongoing uncertainty is creating significant compliance headaches for Web3 infrastructure providers, staking services, validators, and token protocols — especially those offering liquid staking and restaking products.
đź”— Source article (Cointelegraph)
đź’ˇ What Is Staking — and Why It’s Not Just “Yield”
Staking is a core mechanism in Proof-of-Stake (PoS) blockchains like Ethereum, Solana, Avalanche, and Cosmos. It allows users to contribute to network security by locking up tokens, often in return for rewards.
Important distinction:
- âś… Native protocol staking =Â infrastructure participation
- ❌ Centralized staking-as-a-service = potentially a financial product
Without clearly separating these, the SEC risks regulating infrastructure out of existence.
🧠RatEx42 Analysis: The Risks of Regulatory Silence
After rating dozens of staking protocols — including Lido DAO, Pendle, and EigenLayer — we’ve observed a common threat: lack of legal clarity blocks adoption.
📉 Key risks we identify:
| Risk Type | Impact |
|---|---|
| Legal ambiguity | Protocols can’t assess risk exposure properly |
| Investor hesitation | Institutions avoid unlicensed yield products |
| Developer slowdown | Teams relocate or halt product development |
| Jurisdictional fragmentation | Global firms face inconsistent rules |
âś… What RatEx42 Recommends
As a compliance-first DeFi rating platform, RatEx42 supports progressive, differentiated regulation.
We advocate that the SEC:
- Clearly separate protocol-level staking from custodial staking services
- Provide safe harbor guidance for validator participation and liquid staking
- Align with international efforts (e.g., MiCA, MAS, ASIC) to prevent fragmentation
- Recognize the systemic role of staking in secure decentralized infrastructure
đź“Š How RatEx42 Reflects This in Ratings
Until proper guidance is issued, RatEx42 will:
- Mark all staking-related protocols with heightened legal risk in our scoring matrix
- Evaluate whether a protocol offers true infrastructure staking vs. intermediated “yield”
- Distinguish between DAO-run governance and centralized control over staking logic
This approach helps readers and institutions make data-informed decisions even in the absence of regulatory certainty.
đź“Ž Conclusion
The SEC has a historic opportunity: either lead the world with smart, modular staking policy — or fall further behind. For the sake of developers, investors, and network security, staking must be recognized for what it is: infrastructure, not speculation.
đź“© For further updates and compliance ratings across staking platforms:
→ Visit the RatEx42 Ratings Portal
🧠Follow our ongoing research:
→ Twitter @RatEx42
→ Telegram @RatEx42