The debate over Ethereum’s regulatory classification has taken center stage once again, as Paul Grewal, Chief Legal Officer (CLO) of Coinbase, publicly reaffirmed that Ethereum (ETH) is a commodity—not a security. In a recent statement, Grewal emphasized that the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has no valid justification for rejecting applications for spot Ethereum exchange-traded products (ETPs). His argument builds on years of regulatory precedent, legal analysis, and market evolution surrounding the second-largest cryptocurrency by market capitalization.
Why Ethereum Qualifies as a Commodity
Grewal’s position is rooted in both historical statements from within the SEC and broader regulatory consensus. He pointed out that the classification of ETH as a commodity is not a new or controversial idea—it reflects long-standing interpretations by key U.S. financial authorities.
For instance, former SEC Director of Corporation Finance William Hinman stated in a 2018 speech that Ethereum does not meet the definition of a security. At the time, Hinman explained that while initial Ethereum offerings may have had characteristics of investment contracts, the network had evolved into a decentralized ecosystem where purchasers no longer rely on a central promoter’s efforts—core to the Howey Test, the legal standard used to determine whether an asset qualifies as a security.
👉 Discover how evolving crypto regulations are shaping investment opportunities in 2025.
Moreover, before becoming SEC Chair, Gary Gensler himself testified before Congress that ETH is more akin to a commodity like oil or wheat, especially given its use in decentralized applications and smart contracts. This aligns with the stance of the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), which has consistently classified Ethereum as a commodity since at least 2015. The CFTC even oversees regulated ETH futures contracts, which have been traded on approved platforms since 2021.
Regulatory Consistency Matters
A key pillar of Grewal’s argument is regulatory consistency. If the SEC continues to block spot ETH ETFs while allowing futures-based ETFs and acknowledging other digital assets as commodities, it risks undermining market confidence and creating legal contradictions.
The existence of CFTC-regulated Ethereum futures markets reinforces the idea that ETH operates within the commodity framework. Futures contracts require clear underlying asset classification, and their approval signals federal recognition of ETH’s status. Denying spot ETFs without addressing this contradiction appears arbitrary and legally unsound.
Furthermore, multiple federal courts have acknowledged the distinction between decentralized cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin and Ethereum versus centralized token offerings that may qualify as securities. These rulings support the notion that mature, decentralized networks do not fall under traditional securities laws.
The Howey Test and Ethereum
One of the most critical legal benchmarks in U.S. securities law is the Howey Test, derived from the Supreme Court case SEC v. W.J. Howey Co. According to this test, an asset is considered a security if there is:
- An investment of money
- In a common enterprise
- With an expectation of profits derived from the efforts of others
Grewal asserts that Ethereum fails to meet the third prong. Today’s Ethereum ecosystem is highly decentralized. No single entity or development team controls the network, and returns for holders are not dependent on any central promoter’s actions. Validators, developers, and users all contribute independently, making it fundamentally different from early-stage projects that raise funds through token sales.
Even if one were to apply the Howey Test retrospectively to Ethereum’s 2015 launch, Grewal argues that current market conditions render such analysis obsolete. Markets evolve, and regulators must account for technological maturity and decentralization when assessing asset classification.
Why Spot ETF Approval Matters
Approving a spot Ethereum ETF would be a pivotal moment for mainstream crypto adoption. Unlike futures-based ETFs, which track derivative prices and can deviate from actual spot values, spot ETFs hold real ETH in custody. This provides investors with direct exposure to price movements, enhances market transparency, and strengthens institutional trust.
Several major financial firms have already filed applications with the SEC, citing growing demand from retail and institutional investors alike. Delaying approval without clear reasoning creates uncertainty and pushes innovation offshore—where regulators are more accommodating.
👉 Learn how next-gen crypto investment vehicles are transforming portfolio strategies.
FAQs: Understanding the ETH ETF Debate
Q: What is the difference between a spot ETF and a futures-based ETF?
A: A spot ETF holds the actual underlying asset—in this case, Ethereum—and its price closely tracks the current market value. A futures-based ETF invests in ETH futures contracts, which can trade at premiums or discounts to the spot price and involve expiration dates and rollover costs.
Q: Has the SEC approved any crypto spot ETFs?
A: As of now, the SEC has only approved Bitcoin spot ETFs in early 2024. No Ethereum spot ETF has been officially authorized, despite multiple applications and strong legal arguments supporting approval.
Q: Can the SEC legally classify ETH as a security?
A: While the SEC has authority over securities, its classification must align with existing law and precedent. Overruling years of internal statements, CFTC rulings, and court decisions without substantial justification could be challenged in court.
Q: What impact would an ETH spot ETF have on the market?
A: It would likely increase liquidity, attract institutional capital, reduce volatility over time, and enhance regulatory clarity for other digital assets.
Q: Is there bipartisan support for clearer crypto regulation?
A: Yes. Lawmakers from both major U.S. political parties have called for comprehensive digital asset legislation to provide legal certainty and prevent regulatory overreach.
Q: How does decentralization affect ETH’s classification?
A: High decentralization weakens the argument that investors rely on a central party for profit, which is essential under the Howey Test. The more distributed a network’s control and development, the less likely it is to be deemed a security.
👉 See how leading institutions are preparing for the next phase of digital asset integration.
The Path Forward
The case for recognizing Ethereum as a commodity—and approving a spot ETF—is stronger than ever. With consistent regulatory signals from multiple agencies, judicial precedents, and market maturity, continued resistance from the SEC appears increasingly untenable.
As Paul Grewal rightly points out, millions of Americans already own ETH. They participate in staking, decentralized finance (DeFi), and non-fungible token (NFT) ecosystems—all built on Ethereum’s open infrastructure. Treating this foundational technology as anything other than a commodity risks misaligning regulation with reality.
Moving forward, clear guidance from Congress or decisive court rulings may be necessary to resolve the current impasse. Until then, stakeholders will continue pushing for fair treatment under U.S. financial law—ensuring innovation remains within reach for American investors and entrepreneurs.
Keywords: Ethereum ETF, ETH as commodity, SEC crypto regulation, spot Ethereum ETF, Howey Test crypto, Coinbase legal opinion, CFTC Ethereum