The SEC approved Ethereum ETFs through delegated authority, a decision that could significantly impact the crypto market. Unlike the Bitcoin ETF approval in January, which required an SEC vote, this approval did not undergo a public voting process by commissioners. This method of approval, as noted by James Seyffart, means any commissioner, such as Crenshaw, can request a review, though it would not alter the decision.
The lack of a public vote has raised questions about the political forces within the SEC. Seyffart highlights that while delegated authority is the norm for many decisions, the lack of transparency in this case leaves room for speculation about the commissioners’ stances. Per Seyffart, the absence of a detailed voting record obscures the political lines drawn during the approval process.
Gabriel Shapiro from MetaLeX commented on the procedural nuances, noting that only 19b-4s were approved, not S-1s, arguing that this technical distinction explains why Ethereum did not experience a significant price increase following the news and suggesting it could still be denied.
This community confusion led Bloomberg ETF expert Eric Balchunas to confirm that the approval process was standard and wouldn’t be “challenged in any meaningful way.” Balchunas reiterated that while the approval is final, the procedural method used was typical for the SEC. He suggested that the muted market reaction was due to the expected approval, especially after significant news earlier in the week.
The approval of Ethereum ETFs signifies a potentially positive outlook for future crypto ETF applications. However, the SEC’s delegated authority process has sparked discussions about the need for greater transparency from the SEC and the potential political influences behind such decisions.
