The Hyperliquid Policy Center has asked the SEC to spell out how it treats crypto airdrops and token buybacks, arguing that the current ambiguity is costing the U.S. both innovation and talent. The group made its case in a direct appeal to the regulator this week, framing clearer definitions as a prerequisite for keeping builders onshore.
It's not a new complaint. Airdrops in particular have sat in a legal gray zone for years, with projects unsure whether handing tokens to early users counts as a securities offering. The policy center wants the SEC to say what's allowed rather than leave issuers to guess.
Why airdrops are the sticking point
The policy center's argument runs through airdrops first. Distributing tokens to users is a standard bootstrapping tool for decentralized projects, but the lack of formal guidance means teams often treat it as a liability instead of a growth lever. That pushes launches toward jurisdictions with clearer rules, or offshore entirely.
Buybacks get the same treatment in the filing. A project buying back its own token can look like market manipulation to one regulator and like ordinary treasury management to another, and the policy center wants the SEC to pick a lane.
The talent-drain argument
The group is leaning on a familiar line: unclear rules are a recruiting problem. Developers who could build in the U.S. are choosing to build somewhere else, and the policy center says that's a direct consequence of regulatory uncertainty rather than a lack of ambition. It's the kind of claim that's hard to measure but easy to sell to policymakers who care about jobs.
It also gives the SEC a practical reason to act. Enforcement-first regulation has produced a steady stream of settlements without giving the industry a clear map of what's legal. The policy center is effectively offering a trade: clearer rules in exchange for a domestic talent base.
Consistency across states
The third pillar is state-level fragmentation. Crypto firms currently navigate a patchwork of state regimes alongside federal ambiguity, and the policy center argues that a clear federal standard would reduce the cost of compliance and prevent conflicting interpretations from piling up.
That argument has gained traction in other corners of financial regulation this year, though the SEC hasn't committed to a specific timeline for airdrop or buyback guidance. The policy center's letter puts the question on the record without forcing an immediate answer.
What the SEC does next
The regulator hasn't issued a public response to the policy center's request. Until it does, the practical situation for token issuers is unchanged: airdrops and buybacks remain legally unsettled, and projects deciding where to launch will keep weighing U.S. jurisdiction against the cost of not knowing the rules.
The policy center's ask is narrow — clarify, don't legislate. Whether the SEC treats it as a priority or files it alongside the industry's other pending requests is the open question.
