William & Mary Business Law Review
Abstract
The regulatory scheme for the crypto industry can be described as uncertain, at best. The lack of regulatory clarity and agency overreliance on enforcement actions in the place of proper rulemaking will stifle the industry in U.S. markets. The SEC’s haphazard regulatory approach has created more questions and uncertainty. Staff Accounting Bulletin 121 (“SAB 121”) is a prime example of how the SEC’s desperate grasp for regulatory authority implicates the major questions doctrine and the Administrative Procedures Act. This Article analyzes current crypto litigation alongside SAB 121. It identifies a pattern of circumventing the Administrative Procedures Act and violations of the major questions doctrine in crypto actions taken by the SEC. This Article concludes that the current regulatory approach will likely cause irrevocable harm to the crypto industry and procedures under the Administrative Procedures Act. Judicial intervention is required, but piecemeal litigations pose a further risk to the industry. Courts should review and understand the entire regulatory scheme, not just the coin or regulation at issue, to fully appreciate the major questions doctrine and procedural implications posed by agencies in their rushed and ineffective approach to regulating the crypto industry.