Author: Jae, PANews Another project in the crypto space has received the green light from the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission). The SEC recently issued a No-Action Letter (NAL) to Fuse Crypto Limited (hereinafter referred to as Fuse) regarding its native token, Energy Dollar, formally confirming that under certain issuance and sale structures, the ENERGY token will not be considered a security. This development not only gives Fuse a compliance advantage, but also means that the DePIN (Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Network) track can more easily complete the compliance puzzle compared to other tracks. SEC approves Fuse to issue ENERGY tokens On November 24, the SEC issued a crucial NAL (Non-Allowed Decision) regarding Fuse's ENERGY token. This decision further demonstrates the SEC's systemic shift in regulatory attitude, especially towards blockchain projects aimed at solving real-world problems. Fuse Energy is a DePIN project focused on energy technology innovation. Its core business is an energy network operating on the Solana blockchain, which incentivizes home users to install and use DERs (distributed energy resources), such as rooftop solar panels, electric vehicle charging stations, and home energy storage batteries, through a reward system. Fuse aims to coordinate these decentralized resources, helping to deconstruct the power grid and manage load pressure, thereby alleviating grid congestion. NAL stated that as long as Fuse strictly adheres to the issuance and sale methods described in its filing on November 19, the SEC will not take enforcement action against it under Section 5 (Registration of Issuance) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 12(g) (Registration of Equity Securities) of the Exchange Act of 1934. The compliance exemption for the ENERGY token is not an isolated case. Multicoin Capital, heavily invested in the DePIN sector, led funding rounds of $12 million and $28 million for DePIN projects Fuse and DoubleZero, respectively. Coincidentally, Fuse's NAL is the second similar document issued by the SEC in a short period, following DoubleZero's 2Z token receiving a similar NAL in September. Perhaps Multicoin Capital recognized the significant compliance potential of these two DePIN projects early on, or perhaps their successive NAL grants were facilitated by Multicoin Capital. These continuous positive signals indicate that the SEC's regulatory approach is shifting from past enforcement measures to conditional compliance guidance. With the support of its new leadership, the SEC is attempting to establish a "token taxonomy" to differentiate between utility tokens and investment contracts. The emergence of NAL provides regulatory protection for projects with utility value. This regulatory clarity may significantly reduce compliance risks in the DePIN market. The compliance cost of the ENERGY token will be the sacrifice of business model flexibility. NAL is an administrative decision. The SEC will conduct an in-depth review of Fuse Energy's business model based on the core standards of U.S. securities law, namely the Howey Test, and make a judgment based on specific facts and circumstances. Therefore, NAL has strict limitations. The SEC stated in its announcement that any different facts or circumstances could lead the department to different conclusions. This wording will impose long-term compliance constraints on Fuse Energy, effectively "locking in" Fuse's business model, token issuance method, and marketing strategy in its SEC filings. Any attempt by Fuse to define the ENERGY token as an investment contract, or to imply that its value will increase due to the project's management efforts, will constitute legal risk and could lead to the SEC revoking NAL. In short, this compliance will sacrifice flexibility in business models. Fuse Energy's key to circumventing Howey's test lies in the fact that the project's token economics model caused it to fail to meet the fourth element of an investment contract, namely, the reasonable expectation that profits will come from "the efforts of others". Fuse Energy's core argument is that users acquire ENERGY tokens for consumption and rewards, not for investment. How to acquire: Users do not directly invest money to earn ENERGY tokens, but rather participate in network activities and contribute physical resources, including reducing energy consumption during peak hours, using electric vehicle charging stations, and storing solar energy. This makes the incentive of ENERGY tokens more like a "loyalty reward" for environmentally friendly behavior. Distributed effort: In Fuse Energy's architecture, the increase in token value depends primarily on the efforts and contributions of a large number of participants (i.e., users' own device deployment and operation), rather than solely on the centralized management and efforts of the Fuse team. This legal justification for "distributed effort" may lay a solid regulatory compliance foundation for the DePIN project. To further decouple the token from the project's financial success, Fuse has adopted a de-investment approach in its token value design. The redemption value of the ENERGY token is pegged to Fuse's profit margin and the average market price of the token at the time of its use. This design aims to ensure that ENERGY is viewed as an immediate utility token, encouraging users to consume it quickly (e.g., to obtain electricity discounts or carbon offsets). Since the value of the ENERGY token does not depend on Fuse's financial success, users are less motivated to hoard tokens in anticipation of future performance gains. These factors combined led the SEC to determine that the ENERGY token did not meet the definition of an investment contract. Beyond token compliance, Fuse still faces regulatory challenges on the business side. NAL has temporarily resolved the compliance risk of ENERGY tokens being treated as securities, but Fuse Energy is not now completely worry-free. Fuse sacrificed token liquidity for compliance. Users cannot freely transfer tokens, and the exit channels for funds are limited and singular, significantly reducing the asset's attractiveness. If Fuse Energy becomes complacent and changes its products or token mechanisms (such as opening up secondary market trading or changing pricing strategies), or if its actual operations do not match its stated facts, NAL will not be legally binding. The SEC can withdraw its application and initiate enforcement proceedings at any time, posing a risk of regulatory backlash. Therefore, despite the fact that the ENERGY token has been "de-securitized," Fuse still has a responsibility to increase its operational transparency, disclose the risks of the project, and strengthen education for market participants to ensure that users do not misunderstand it as a traditional investment contract. It is worth noting that the energy sector is a highly localized market, typically subject to strict regulation by state and local utility commissions. Regulatory compliance and licensing: Fuse will likely spend significant resources dealing with complex administrative procedures to obtain the licenses and approvals required to operate in different states or territories. Potential policy constraints from utility companies: Traditional utility companies typically possess a mature customer base, infrastructure, and political influence. These companies may leverage their brand advantage to hinder the growth of retail providers like Fuse and competitors, and further restrict the development space of non-utility developers by implementing regulatory policies related to renewable energy. The SEC's approval of Fuse represents a rational return for regulators to the niche market of "utility tokens." For the industry, this is both a shot in the arm and a wake-up call: compliance often comes at the cost of sacrificing investment value and liquidity. While celebrating this regulatory breakthrough, the market needs to clearly recognize that this is merely an endorsement of a specific business model, not a euphoria leading to the complete "de-securitization" of tokens.Author: Jae, PANews Another project in the crypto space has received the green light from the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission). The SEC recently issued a No-Action Letter (NAL) to Fuse Crypto Limited (hereinafter referred to as Fuse) regarding its native token, Energy Dollar, formally confirming that under certain issuance and sale structures, the ENERGY token will not be considered a security. This development not only gives Fuse a compliance advantage, but also means that the DePIN (Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Network) track can more easily complete the compliance puzzle compared to other tracks. SEC approves Fuse to issue ENERGY tokens On November 24, the SEC issued a crucial NAL (Non-Allowed Decision) regarding Fuse's ENERGY token. This decision further demonstrates the SEC's systemic shift in regulatory attitude, especially towards blockchain projects aimed at solving real-world problems. Fuse Energy is a DePIN project focused on energy technology innovation. Its core business is an energy network operating on the Solana blockchain, which incentivizes home users to install and use DERs (distributed energy resources), such as rooftop solar panels, electric vehicle charging stations, and home energy storage batteries, through a reward system. Fuse aims to coordinate these decentralized resources, helping to deconstruct the power grid and manage load pressure, thereby alleviating grid congestion. NAL stated that as long as Fuse strictly adheres to the issuance and sale methods described in its filing on November 19, the SEC will not take enforcement action against it under Section 5 (Registration of Issuance) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 12(g) (Registration of Equity Securities) of the Exchange Act of 1934. The compliance exemption for the ENERGY token is not an isolated case. Multicoin Capital, heavily invested in the DePIN sector, led funding rounds of $12 million and $28 million for DePIN projects Fuse and DoubleZero, respectively. Coincidentally, Fuse's NAL is the second similar document issued by the SEC in a short period, following DoubleZero's 2Z token receiving a similar NAL in September. Perhaps Multicoin Capital recognized the significant compliance potential of these two DePIN projects early on, or perhaps their successive NAL grants were facilitated by Multicoin Capital. These continuous positive signals indicate that the SEC's regulatory approach is shifting from past enforcement measures to conditional compliance guidance. With the support of its new leadership, the SEC is attempting to establish a "token taxonomy" to differentiate between utility tokens and investment contracts. The emergence of NAL provides regulatory protection for projects with utility value. This regulatory clarity may significantly reduce compliance risks in the DePIN market. The compliance cost of the ENERGY token will be the sacrifice of business model flexibility. NAL is an administrative decision. The SEC will conduct an in-depth review of Fuse Energy's business model based on the core standards of U.S. securities law, namely the Howey Test, and make a judgment based on specific facts and circumstances. Therefore, NAL has strict limitations. The SEC stated in its announcement that any different facts or circumstances could lead the department to different conclusions. This wording will impose long-term compliance constraints on Fuse Energy, effectively "locking in" Fuse's business model, token issuance method, and marketing strategy in its SEC filings. Any attempt by Fuse to define the ENERGY token as an investment contract, or to imply that its value will increase due to the project's management efforts, will constitute legal risk and could lead to the SEC revoking NAL. In short, this compliance will sacrifice flexibility in business models. Fuse Energy's key to circumventing Howey's test lies in the fact that the project's token economics model caused it to fail to meet the fourth element of an investment contract, namely, the reasonable expectation that profits will come from "the efforts of others". Fuse Energy's core argument is that users acquire ENERGY tokens for consumption and rewards, not for investment. How to acquire: Users do not directly invest money to earn ENERGY tokens, but rather participate in network activities and contribute physical resources, including reducing energy consumption during peak hours, using electric vehicle charging stations, and storing solar energy. This makes the incentive of ENERGY tokens more like a "loyalty reward" for environmentally friendly behavior. Distributed effort: In Fuse Energy's architecture, the increase in token value depends primarily on the efforts and contributions of a large number of participants (i.e., users' own device deployment and operation), rather than solely on the centralized management and efforts of the Fuse team. This legal justification for "distributed effort" may lay a solid regulatory compliance foundation for the DePIN project. To further decouple the token from the project's financial success, Fuse has adopted a de-investment approach in its token value design. The redemption value of the ENERGY token is pegged to Fuse's profit margin and the average market price of the token at the time of its use. This design aims to ensure that ENERGY is viewed as an immediate utility token, encouraging users to consume it quickly (e.g., to obtain electricity discounts or carbon offsets). Since the value of the ENERGY token does not depend on Fuse's financial success, users are less motivated to hoard tokens in anticipation of future performance gains. These factors combined led the SEC to determine that the ENERGY token did not meet the definition of an investment contract. Beyond token compliance, Fuse still faces regulatory challenges on the business side. NAL has temporarily resolved the compliance risk of ENERGY tokens being treated as securities, but Fuse Energy is not now completely worry-free. Fuse sacrificed token liquidity for compliance. Users cannot freely transfer tokens, and the exit channels for funds are limited and singular, significantly reducing the asset's attractiveness. If Fuse Energy becomes complacent and changes its products or token mechanisms (such as opening up secondary market trading or changing pricing strategies), or if its actual operations do not match its stated facts, NAL will not be legally binding. The SEC can withdraw its application and initiate enforcement proceedings at any time, posing a risk of regulatory backlash. Therefore, despite the fact that the ENERGY token has been "de-securitized," Fuse still has a responsibility to increase its operational transparency, disclose the risks of the project, and strengthen education for market participants to ensure that users do not misunderstand it as a traditional investment contract. It is worth noting that the energy sector is a highly localized market, typically subject to strict regulation by state and local utility commissions. Regulatory compliance and licensing: Fuse will likely spend significant resources dealing with complex administrative procedures to obtain the licenses and approvals required to operate in different states or territories. Potential policy constraints from utility companies: Traditional utility companies typically possess a mature customer base, infrastructure, and political influence. These companies may leverage their brand advantage to hinder the growth of retail providers like Fuse and competitors, and further restrict the development space of non-utility developers by implementing regulatory policies related to renewable energy. The SEC's approval of Fuse represents a rational return for regulators to the niche market of "utility tokens." For the industry, this is both a shot in the arm and a wake-up call: compliance often comes at the cost of sacrificing investment value and liquidity. While celebrating this regulatory breakthrough, the market needs to clearly recognize that this is merely an endorsement of a specific business model, not a euphoria leading to the complete "de-securitization" of tokens.

Fuse received an SEC exemption for issuing tokens. Why is it easier for DePIN projects to obtain approval?

2025/11/27 17:05
7 min read
For feedback or concerns regarding this content, please contact us at crypto.news@mexc.com

Author: Jae, PANews

Another project in the crypto space has received the green light from the SEC (Securities and Exchange Commission). The SEC recently issued a No-Action Letter (NAL) to Fuse Crypto Limited (hereinafter referred to as Fuse) regarding its native token, Energy Dollar, formally confirming that under certain issuance and sale structures, the ENERGY token will not be considered a security.

This development not only gives Fuse a compliance advantage, but also means that the DePIN (Decentralized Physical Infrastructure Network) track can more easily complete the compliance puzzle compared to other tracks.

SEC approves Fuse to issue ENERGY tokens

On November 24, the SEC issued a crucial NAL (Non-Allowed Decision) regarding Fuse's ENERGY token. This decision further demonstrates the SEC's systemic shift in regulatory attitude, especially towards blockchain projects aimed at solving real-world problems.

Fuse Energy is a DePIN project focused on energy technology innovation. Its core business is an energy network operating on the Solana blockchain, which incentivizes home users to install and use DERs (distributed energy resources), such as rooftop solar panels, electric vehicle charging stations, and home energy storage batteries, through a reward system. Fuse aims to coordinate these decentralized resources, helping to deconstruct the power grid and manage load pressure, thereby alleviating grid congestion.

NAL stated that as long as Fuse strictly adheres to the issuance and sale methods described in its filing on November 19, the SEC will not take enforcement action against it under Section 5 (Registration of Issuance) of the Securities Act of 1933 and Section 12(g) (Registration of Equity Securities) of the Exchange Act of 1934.

The compliance exemption for the ENERGY token is not an isolated case. Multicoin Capital, heavily invested in the DePIN sector, led funding rounds of $12 million and $28 million for DePIN projects Fuse and DoubleZero, respectively. Coincidentally, Fuse's NAL is the second similar document issued by the SEC in a short period, following DoubleZero's 2Z token receiving a similar NAL in September. Perhaps Multicoin Capital recognized the significant compliance potential of these two DePIN projects early on, or perhaps their successive NAL grants were facilitated by Multicoin Capital.

These continuous positive signals indicate that the SEC's regulatory approach is shifting from past enforcement measures to conditional compliance guidance. With the support of its new leadership, the SEC is attempting to establish a "token taxonomy" to differentiate between utility tokens and investment contracts. The emergence of NAL provides regulatory protection for projects with utility value. This regulatory clarity may significantly reduce compliance risks in the DePIN market.

The compliance cost of the ENERGY token will be the sacrifice of business model flexibility.

NAL is an administrative decision. The SEC will conduct an in-depth review of Fuse Energy's business model based on the core standards of U.S. securities law, namely the Howey Test, and make a judgment based on specific facts and circumstances.

Therefore, NAL has strict limitations. The SEC stated in its announcement that any different facts or circumstances could lead the department to different conclusions. This wording will impose long-term compliance constraints on Fuse Energy, effectively "locking in" Fuse's business model, token issuance method, and marketing strategy in its SEC filings. Any attempt by Fuse to define the ENERGY token as an investment contract, or to imply that its value will increase due to the project's management efforts, will constitute legal risk and could lead to the SEC revoking NAL.

In short, this compliance will sacrifice flexibility in business models.

Fuse Energy's key to circumventing Howey's test lies in the fact that the project's token economics model caused it to fail to meet the fourth element of an investment contract, namely, the reasonable expectation that profits will come from "the efforts of others".

Fuse Energy's core argument is that users acquire ENERGY tokens for consumption and rewards, not for investment.

  • How to acquire: Users do not directly invest money to earn ENERGY tokens, but rather participate in network activities and contribute physical resources, including reducing energy consumption during peak hours, using electric vehicle charging stations, and storing solar energy. This makes the incentive of ENERGY tokens more like a "loyalty reward" for environmentally friendly behavior.
  • Distributed effort: In Fuse Energy's architecture, the increase in token value depends primarily on the efforts and contributions of a large number of participants (i.e., users' own device deployment and operation), rather than solely on the centralized management and efforts of the Fuse team. This legal justification for "distributed effort" may lay a solid regulatory compliance foundation for the DePIN project.

To further decouple the token from the project's financial success, Fuse has adopted a de-investment approach in its token value design. The redemption value of the ENERGY token is pegged to Fuse's profit margin and the average market price of the token at the time of its use. This design aims to ensure that ENERGY is viewed as an immediate utility token, encouraging users to consume it quickly (e.g., to obtain electricity discounts or carbon offsets). Since the value of the ENERGY token does not depend on Fuse's financial success, users are less motivated to hoard tokens in anticipation of future performance gains.

These factors combined led the SEC to determine that the ENERGY token did not meet the definition of an investment contract.

Beyond token compliance, Fuse still faces regulatory challenges on the business side.

NAL has temporarily resolved the compliance risk of ENERGY tokens being treated as securities, but Fuse Energy is not now completely worry-free. Fuse sacrificed token liquidity for compliance. Users cannot freely transfer tokens, and the exit channels for funds are limited and singular, significantly reducing the asset's attractiveness.

If Fuse Energy becomes complacent and changes its products or token mechanisms (such as opening up secondary market trading or changing pricing strategies), or if its actual operations do not match its stated facts, NAL will not be legally binding. The SEC can withdraw its application and initiate enforcement proceedings at any time, posing a risk of regulatory backlash.

Therefore, despite the fact that the ENERGY token has been "de-securitized," Fuse still has a responsibility to increase its operational transparency, disclose the risks of the project, and strengthen education for market participants to ensure that users do not misunderstand it as a traditional investment contract.

It is worth noting that the energy sector is a highly localized market, typically subject to strict regulation by state and local utility commissions.

  • Regulatory compliance and licensing: Fuse will likely spend significant resources dealing with complex administrative procedures to obtain the licenses and approvals required to operate in different states or territories.
  • Potential policy constraints from utility companies: Traditional utility companies typically possess a mature customer base, infrastructure, and political influence. These companies may leverage their brand advantage to hinder the growth of retail providers like Fuse and competitors, and further restrict the development space of non-utility developers by implementing regulatory policies related to renewable energy.

The SEC's approval of Fuse represents a rational return for regulators to the niche market of "utility tokens." For the industry, this is both a shot in the arm and a wake-up call: compliance often comes at the cost of sacrificing investment value and liquidity. While celebrating this regulatory breakthrough, the market needs to clearly recognize that this is merely an endorsement of a specific business model, not a euphoria leading to the complete "de-securitization" of tokens.

Market Opportunity
Fuse Network Logo
Fuse Network Price(FUSE)
$0.003704
$0.003704$0.003704
-0.48%
USD
Fuse Network (FUSE) Live Price Chart
Disclaimer: The articles reposted on this site are sourced from public platforms and are provided for informational purposes only. They do not necessarily reflect the views of MEXC. All rights remain with the original authors. If you believe any content infringes on third-party rights, please contact crypto.news@mexc.com for removal. MEXC makes no guarantees regarding the accuracy, completeness, or timeliness of the content and is not responsible for any actions taken based on the information provided. The content does not constitute financial, legal, or other professional advice, nor should it be considered a recommendation or endorsement by MEXC.

You May Also Like

XRP Ledger Stablecoin Supply Jumps 100% Since December

XRP Ledger Stablecoin Supply Jumps 100% Since December

TLDR Stablecoin supply on the XRP Ledger reached $568 million after rising more than 100% since December 2025. The number of wallets holding less than 100 XRP climbed
Share
Coincentral2026/03/24 00:43
XRP Price Prediction as Iran Denies Trump’s Claim of Productive Talks

XRP Price Prediction as Iran Denies Trump’s Claim of Productive Talks

The post XRP Price Prediction as Iran Denies Trump’s Claim of Productive Talks appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. XRP remained near a critical support level on
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2026/03/24 00:23
One Of Frank Sinatra’s Most Famous Albums Is Back In The Spotlight

One Of Frank Sinatra’s Most Famous Albums Is Back In The Spotlight

The post One Of Frank Sinatra’s Most Famous Albums Is Back In The Spotlight appeared on BitcoinEthereumNews.com. Frank Sinatra’s The World We Knew returns to the Jazz Albums and Traditional Jazz Albums charts, showing continued demand for his timeless music. Frank Sinatra performs on his TV special Frank Sinatra: A Man and his Music Bettmann Archive These days on the Billboard charts, Frank Sinatra’s music can always be found on the jazz-specific rankings. While the art he created when he was still working was pop at the time, and later classified as traditional pop, there is no such list for the latter format in America, and so his throwback projects and cuts appear on jazz lists instead. It’s on those charts where Sinatra rebounds this week, and one of his popular projects returns not to one, but two tallies at the same time, helping him increase the total amount of real estate he owns at the moment. Frank Sinatra’s The World We Knew Returns Sinatra’s The World We Knew is a top performer again, if only on the jazz lists. That set rebounds to No. 15 on the Traditional Jazz Albums chart and comes in at No. 20 on the all-encompassing Jazz Albums ranking after not appearing on either roster just last frame. The World We Knew’s All-Time Highs The World We Knew returns close to its all-time peak on both of those rosters. Sinatra’s classic has peaked at No. 11 on the Traditional Jazz Albums chart, just missing out on becoming another top 10 for the crooner. The set climbed all the way to No. 15 on the Jazz Albums tally and has now spent just under two months on the rosters. Frank Sinatra’s Album With Classic Hits Sinatra released The World We Knew in the summer of 1967. The title track, which on the album is actually known as “The World We Knew (Over and…
Share
BitcoinEthereumNews2025/09/18 00:02