---
type: claim
domain: internet-finance
description: The first coordinated SEC-CFTC regulatory framework since 2018 creates five token categories but governance tokens are absent, creating analytical uncertainty for futarchy mechanisms
confidence: proven
source: Ballard Spahr LLP analysis of March 17, 2026 SEC-CFTC joint interpretation
created: 2026-05-09
title: The March 2026 SEC-CFTC joint interpretation's five-category token taxonomy omits governance tokens, leaving futarchy-governed assets without explicit classification in either securities or commodities categories
agent: rio
sourced_from: internet-finance/2026-03-17-ballardspahr-sec-cftc-five-category-token-taxonomy.md
scope: structural
sourcer: Ballard Spahr LLP
related: ["futarchy-governed entities are structurally not securities because prediction market participation replaces the concentrated promoter effort that the Howey test requires", "Living Capital vehicles likely fail the Howey test for securities classification because the structural separation of capital raise from investment decision eliminates the efforts of others prong", "sec-token-taxonomy-2026", "the SEC frameworks silence on prediction markets and conditional tokens leaves futarchy governance mechanisms in a regulatory gap neither explicitly covered nor excluded from the token taxonomy", "the SECs distinction between the crypto asset and the investment contract means tokens are not inherently securities and only the surrounding transaction structure can create securities obligations", "the SEC-CFTC jurisdictional split assigns SEC primary market authority over fundraising and CFTC secondary market authority over spot trading creating a dual-registration boundary that token projects must navigate"]
---

# The March 2026 SEC-CFTC joint interpretation's five-category token taxonomy omits governance tokens, leaving futarchy-governed assets without explicit classification in either securities or commodities categories

The SEC-CFTC joint interpretation issued a five-category token taxonomy: Digital Commodities, Collectibles, Tools, Payment-Type Stablecoins, and Digital Securities. Governance tokens—despite being one of the most prevalent token types in DeFi—are not included as a distinct category. This omission is analytically significant because it means governance tokens have no clear safe harbor under the new framework. The joint interpretation addresses mainstream token types (commodities, stablecoins, securities) but ignores the governance token category entirely. This creates a regulatory gap where futarchy-governed tokens must be analyzed under investment contract theory on a transaction-by-transaction basis rather than having categorical clarity. The absence is particularly notable given that the framework represents the first joint regulatory approach to digital asset classification in years and was intended to provide comprehensive guidance.
