Key Takeaways
- • SEC Division of Investment Management Staff issued a September 30, 2025 no-action letter permitting registered investment advisers (RIAs) and registered investment companies to use state trust companies as qualified custodians for crypto assets, expanding custody options beyond traditional banks and broker-dealers.
- • The relief applies to crypto assets defined broadly as "digital representations of value recorded on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger," along with cash and cash equivalents necessary for transactions, addressing a multi-year regulatory gap for institutional investors.
- • The SEC's January 2025 rescission of Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) 121 and replacement with SAB 122 eliminated the requirement for firms to recognize crypto assets held for clients as balance sheet liabilities, materially improving the accounting treatment and practical feasibility of crypto custody.
- • The no-action letter does not expand the current custody provisions of the Investment Company Act of 1940 or Investment Advisers Act of 1940 to include crypto assets not already in scope, preserving the distinction between securities and non-securities crypto assets.
- • State trust companies seeking to offer crypto custody services must satisfy specific conditions outlined in the relief, clarifying the definition of "qualified custodian" and "specified custodian" under the Custody Rule and Investment Company Act respectively.
Summary
The SEC has moved decisively to resolve custody ambiguities that have constrained institutional crypto adoption since the emergence of digital assets as an investment class. On September 30, 2025, the SEC's Division of Investment Management Staff issued a no-action letter granting relief to registered investment advisers and registered investment companies—including business development companies—to utilize state trust companies (STCs) as qualified custodians for crypto assets. This action represents a significant milestone in regulatory clarity, removing structural barriers that have prevented traditional institutional investors from accessing crypto strategies through compliant custody arrangements.
For years, RIAs and registered funds faced substantial regulatory uncertainty when attempting to identify qualified custodians for crypto holdings. Traditional banks and broker-dealers, the conventional sources of custody services, have largely avoided crypto due to regulatory ambiguity and operational risk concerns. The SEC's no-action letter explicitly permits STCs to serve this function, provided they meet specified conditions, materially expanding the universe of eligible custodians and reducing friction for institutional capital deployment into digital assets.
The relief employs a deliberately broad definition of "Crypto Assets," encompassing any "digital representations of value recorded on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger," along with attendant cash and cash equivalents necessary for transactional purposes. However, the SEC carefully noted that this clarification does not automatically expand the scope of the Custody Rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 or the specified custodian requirements under the Investment Company Act of 1940 to include crypto assets not already regulated as securities, preserving existing regulatory boundaries between securities and non-securities digital assets.
The custody framework has been further enhanced by complementary SEC actions. In January 2025, the agency rescinded Staff Accounting Bulletin 121 and replaced it with SAB 122, eliminating the requirement for firms to recognize crypto assets held for clients as liabilities on their balance sheets. This accounting treatment modification removes a significant compliance burden and improves the practical economics of offering institutional crypto custody services, making the business model economically viable for qualified custodians.
The SEC's approach clarifies the definition of "bank" and "qualified custodian" under Rule 206(4)-2 of the Advisers Act and related provisions under the Investment Company Act, establishing state trust companies as viable alternatives within the existing regulatory framework. This targeted relief, coupled with prior accounting reforms, represents a phased but material opening of institutional crypto infrastructure that institutional investors, family offices, and alternative asset managers have long sought for diversified digital asset exposure.
For years, RIAs and registered funds faced substantial regulatory uncertainty when attempting to identify qualified custodians for crypto holdings. Traditional banks and broker-dealers, the conventional sources of custody services, have largely avoided crypto due to regulatory ambiguity and operational risk concerns. The SEC's no-action letter explicitly permits STCs to serve this function, provided they meet specified conditions, materially expanding the universe of eligible custodians and reducing friction for institutional capital deployment into digital assets.
The relief employs a deliberately broad definition of "Crypto Assets," encompassing any "digital representations of value recorded on a cryptographically secured distributed ledger," along with attendant cash and cash equivalents necessary for transactional purposes. However, the SEC carefully noted that this clarification does not automatically expand the scope of the Custody Rule under the Investment Advisers Act of 1940 or the specified custodian requirements under the Investment Company Act of 1940 to include crypto assets not already regulated as securities, preserving existing regulatory boundaries between securities and non-securities digital assets.
The custody framework has been further enhanced by complementary SEC actions. In January 2025, the agency rescinded Staff Accounting Bulletin 121 and replaced it with SAB 122, eliminating the requirement for firms to recognize crypto assets held for clients as liabilities on their balance sheets. This accounting treatment modification removes a significant compliance burden and improves the practical economics of offering institutional crypto custody services, making the business model economically viable for qualified custodians.
The SEC's approach clarifies the definition of "bank" and "qualified custodian" under Rule 206(4)-2 of the Advisers Act and related provisions under the Investment Company Act, establishing state trust companies as viable alternatives within the existing regulatory framework. This targeted relief, coupled with prior accounting reforms, represents a phased but material opening of institutional crypto infrastructure that institutional investors, family offices, and alternative asset managers have long sought for diversified digital asset exposure.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.