"Thought the Trump brand would work?"...US SEC withdraws a slew of Truth Social ETFs

▲ Truth Social, cryptocurrency ETF, Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), Solana (SOL)/AI generated image

Three Truth Social cryptocurrency ETFs have been withdrawn from the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) review process. Yorkville America Equities announced that it would shift its product development strategy from the existing 1933 Securities Act framework to the 1940 Investment Company Act framework.

According to BeInCrypto on May 20 (local time), Yorkville America Equities withdrew the Truth Social cryptocurrency ETF registration statements it had filed with the SEC on May 19. The withdrawn ETFs are the Truth Social Bitcoin (BTC) ETF, the Truth Social Bitcoin and Ethereum (ETH) ETF, and the Truth Social Crypto Blue Chip ETF. These ETFs were filed between June and July 2025.

In its filing, Yorkville stated, "The company has decided to withdraw the registration statements and not pursue a public offering at this time. The registration statements have not become effective with the Commission, and the company confirms that no securities have been sold pursuant to these registration statements."

All three withdrawals were filed under Rule 477(a). Yorkville also applied Rule 457(p), requesting that the application fees already paid be credited towards future filings. The company described this decision not as a retreat, but as a shift in regulatory strategy.

Yorkville stated that the 1940 Investment Company Act framework offers stronger investor protection, greater operational flexibility, and expanded access to institutional distribution channels. Steve Neamtz, CEO of Yorkville America, said, "Yorkville America is not retreating; it is moving forward with a stronger product platform."

However, James Seyffart, Senior Research Analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence, questioned Yorkville's explanation. Seyffart pointed out that the industry already knows that ETPs based on the 1933 Securities Act and ETFs based on the 1940 Investment Company Act are different and have varying levels of investor protection, implying that nothing has changed.

Seyffart suggested that competitive pressure might be a greater factor than regulation. He cited Morgan Stanley's spot Bitcoin ETF, MSBT, entering the market with a 14 basis point fee. He continued, "The plan to launch a more flexible crypto-related ETF strategy under the 1940 Investment Company Act structure seems plausible. Does the market really need a 14th spot Bitcoin ETF? A differentiated product would be meaningful."

Yorkville has not disclosed a schedule for relaunching crypto-centric products under the new framework. Consequently, Trump Media's plans for spot Bitcoin and Ethereum ETFs remain on hold until the strategic transition is complete.

*Disclaimer: This article is for investment reference only, and we are not responsible for investment losses based on it. The content should be interpreted for informational purposes only.*