Skip to Content

SEC Deep-Sixes Its Expanded “Dealer” Definition

Last year, the Securities and Exchange Commission amended its definition of “dealer” to require broker-dealer registration by some persons or entities previously considered securities “traders” not subject to such registration. 

The amended dealer definition faced fierce opposition. Some of the reasons why significant elements within the securities industry vigorously opposed the definition are discussed in our articles examining the legal challenges to the SEC’s new dealer definition and analyzing the implications of the SEC’s expanded dealer definition. Crypto advocacy groups also raised concerns that, among other things, the change imposed impractical requirements on financial protocols that do not entail any centralized authority and therefore would have difficulty, for example, enforcing broker-dealer “know your customer” and anti-money laundering requirements.

As anticipated, the SEC’s amendment was promptly challenged in federal court. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the challengers and, in January 2025, just before former SEC Chair Gary Gensler’s final day at the agency, the SEC filed an appeal.  But only a few weeks later, on February 19, 2025, the SEC filed a motion requesting that the appeal be dismissed and confirming that the appellees do not oppose such dismissal.

Although the SEC has not publicly articulated the reasons for its abrupt change of position, the change:

  • Reflects regulatory and cryptocurrency policies favored by the current administration.
  • Implements recent executive actions by President Trump.
  • Demonstrates the SEC’s willingness and ability in some cases to promptly and dramatically reverse its previous policy positions and actions.

To dive deeper, see these related articles from our EO Watch project:

©2025 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.

Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.