Bitcoin and Carbon Credits Team Up in New ETF Rules

2026-19260, Rescission of Rule 14a-8's Federal Regulation of Shareholder Proposals and Amendments to Rule 14a-4

The SEC wants to stop its federal rule that controls how shareholders can make proposals at company meetings, letting state laws and company rules take over instead. They’re also changing rules so companies can sometimes vote on proposals not in their official materials—but shareholders can opt out if they want. This affects investors and companies, with comments open until November 20, 2026, and could shake up how shareholder voices are heard and counted.

2026-18424, Political Contributions by Certain Investment Advisers

The Securities and Exchange Commission (the "Commission" or the "SEC") is proposing to rescind the political contribution rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 (the "Advisers Act"), which prohibits investment advisers from providing investment advisory services for compensation to a government client for two years after an adviser or any covered associate of the adviser makes a contribution to certain categories of elected officials or candidates, among other prohibitions. In the more than fifteen years since the rule was adopted, implementation challenges associated with the political contribution rule have resulted in a range of significant unintended consequences, including compliance practices among some investment advisers that may have had the effect of restricting all political contributions by the investment advisers and their employees. Market participants also have stated that the political contribution rule is burdensome, complex, and both lacks clarity and creates a de facto strict liability standard. The Commission is of the view that other existing requirements of the Advisers Act and its associated rules, including prohibitions on fraud, fiduciary duty requirements, the compliance rule, and the code of ethics rule (defined below), are likely sufficient to address pay-to-play practices while allowing an adviser the flexibility to implement an approach that is more appropriately tailored to its particular risks, rendering the political contribution rule unnecessary. The Commission also is proposing to amend the rule under the Advisers Act pertaining to books and records consistent with the proposed rescission.

2026-18190, Transfer Agent Rules

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission ("SEC" or "Commission") is proposing to adopt new rules, amend existing rules, amend the existing form for registration with the Commission as a transfer agent (Form TA-1) and the existing form for reporting activities of transfer agents (Form TA-2), and rescind an existing rule governing registered transfer agents. The proposals are designed to modernize the rules governing registered transfer agents.

2026-17183, Regulation Crypto Assets

The Securities and Exchange Commission ("Commission") is proposing new rules to create a tailored offering regime for certain investment contracts involving crypto assets. The proposed offering regime is intended to facilitate capital formation and accommodate innovation within the crypto asset markets while, at the same time, ensuring that investors are adequately protected and provided with the information they need to make informed investment decisions. The proposed rules would be set forth in a new regulation titled "Regulation Crypto Assets" and would include two exemptions from the registration requirements of section 5 of the Securities Act of 1933. The first exemption would permit offerings of up to $5 million during a four-year period. The second exemption would permit offerings of up to $75 million during each 12-month period. Under both exemptions, issuers would be required to make certain principles-based narrative disclosures available to their investors. In addition, issuers under the second exemption would be required to provide financial statements and would be subject to ongoing reporting requirements. Issuers that rely on these exemptions would remain subject to the antifraud and antimanipulation provisions of the Federal securities laws. The proposed rules also would include a conditional safe harbor from the term "investment contract" in the definitions of "security" in the Securities Act of 1933 and the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. If the conditions of that proposed safe harbor are satisfied, then a crypto asset would be deemed not to be subject to an investment contract for purposes of those definitions of "security."

2026-12163, The Trade-Through Rule and Locked and Crossed Markets Provisions of Regulation NMS

The SEC wants to scrap some old rules that stop stocks from being traded at worse prices and prevent confusing market quotes. This change affects stock traders and exchanges, aiming to simplify trading and possibly speed things up. If you want to share your thoughts, you’ve got until August 17, 2026, so don’t miss out!

2026-10373, Registered Offering Reform

The SEC wants to make it easier and cheaper for more companies to sell their stocks and bonds to the public. They’re opening up special forms and benefits to more businesses, updating rules to be more modern, and cutting red tape by overriding some state rules. If you’re a company planning to raise money, these changes could speed things up and save you money, with feedback due by July 27, 2026.

Previous: 2025-19060, Publication Procedures for Federal Register Documents During a Funding Hiatus

When the government runs out of money temporarily, the Office of the Federal Register (OFR) only publishes urgent documents that protect people or property, or those tied to funded programs that can’t wait. Agencies must prove their documents are allowed during this pause, or the OFR won’t publish them. This keeps important info flowing without breaking the rules during funding gaps.

Next: 2025-19062, Jody Adams, N.P.; Decision and Order

Jody Adams, a nurse practitioner from Mississippi, tried to get a DEA registration but got denied because she issued three controlled substance prescriptions without proper authorization. This decision means she can’t legally prescribe these drugs, protecting public safety. The denial is final, and no hearing was requested, so the decision is effective immediately with no money penalties mentioned.