Uniswap founder Hayden Adams has accused Citadel Securities founder Ken Griffin of attempting to influence U.S. regulators to impose stricter measures on decentralized finance (DeFi) developers. Adams said Griffin wants the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to treat the engineers who build decentralized protocols as if they were centralized financial intermediaries.

Adams published his criticism on X after Citadel Securities submitted a letter to the SEC about the regulation of tokenized equities and trading platforms. He claimed that Citadel has been lobbying for years to push regulators in this direction.

“Ken Griffin screwed over Constitution DAO before coming for DeFi, asking the SEC to treat software developers of decentralized protocols like centralized intermediaries,” Adams wrote.

He added that one of Citadel’s arguments, that DeFi cannot ensure “fair access,” reveals the firm’s opposition to open-source innovation. Adams described Citadel as “the king of shady TradFi market makers” that dislikes “peer-to-peer tech that can lower the barrier to liquidity creation.”

Citadel Securities urges tighter DeFi rules

Citadel Securities told the SEC that DeFi platforms providing trading of tokenized U.S. equities should not be granted broad exemptive relief from registration and oversight. The firm said that allowing DeFi systems to operate without being subject to the same rules as traditional exchanges would create a dual regulatory regime and violate the technology-neutral principles of the Exchange Act.

“Granting broad exemptive relief to facilitate the trading of a tokenized share via DeFi protocols would create two separate regulatory regimes for the trading of the same security,” Citadel wrote. “This outcome would be the exact opposite of the ‘technology-neutral’ approach taken by the Exchange Act, and would instead preference one technology over all others.”

Citadel argued that many DeFi protocols use automated algorithms that match buyers and sellers in a manner similar to regulated markets. It also stated that various participants, such as wallets, trading applications, and liquidity providers, receive transaction-based fees that make them functionally equivalent to broker-dealers.

The company warned that expanding exemptions could weaken fair access principles, market transparency, investor protections, and anti-front-running safeguards.

“Realizing the potential benefits of tokenization requires applying the key bedrock principles and investor protections that underpin the fairness, efficiency, and resiliency of U.S. equity markets,” the letter stated.

Widespread backlash within the crypto community

Citadel’s position has drawn sharp reactions from crypto advocates and industry figures. Adams’ comments fueled debate across social media, where users criticized Citadel for seeking to apply traditional frameworks to blockchain-based systems.

Summer Mersinger, CEO of the Blockchain Association, called Citadel’s interpretation “overbroad and unworkable.” She urged the SEC to avoid regulating software developers as intermediaries.

“[Citadel’s] interpretation has no grounding in the Exchange Act, decades of Commission practice, judicial precedent, or the commonsense distinction between those who build software and those who custody assets,” Mersinger said in the statement. “Regulating software developers as if they were financial intermediaries would undermine U.S. competitiveness, drive innovation offshore, and do nothing to advance investor protection.”

Similarly, Jake Chervinsky, a lawyer and board member of the Blockchain Association, also commented on the matter.

“Whoever thought Citadel would be against innovation that removes predatory, rent-seeking intermediaries from the financial system?” he asked. “Oh, right, literally every single person in crypto.”

SEC scrutiny of DeFi activity continues

The dispute comes amid heightened regulatory attention on DeFi operations. The SEC has targeted several decentralized projects for alleged violations of securities laws. In one case, regulators concluded that labeling a product as “decentralized” does not exempt it from compliance obligations.

Citadel’s letter urged the SEC to pursue a cautious rulemaking process and to avoid granting special treatment to DeFi protocols. The firm said tokenized securities must comply with the same transparency and reporting standards as traditional equities.

If the SEC embraces Citadel’s approach, protocol developers, user interface operators, validators, and potentially decentralized autonomous organization (DAO) participants could face registration and reporting requirements similar to those imposed on broker-dealers.

Ongoing debate over DeFi’s regulatory identity

The clash between Adams and Citadel underscores the growing tension between decentralized developers and traditional market institutions. DeFi platforms aim to remove intermediaries, while established market makers argue that regulatory consistency is essential to protect investors.

For now, there is little clarity on how regulators will treat decentralized protocol developers under existing laws. Adams’ remarks reflect a broader fear among blockchain innovators that large financial firms are shaping policy in ways that could stifle open-source development and restructure the DeFi landscape.

UK Explores “No Gain, No Loss” Tax Model for DeFi Transactions | HODL FM
The UK government has proposed a new tax framework for…
hodl-post-imageHODL FM: The Wildest Ride in the Crypto MarketMatvii Diadkov
hodl-post-image

Disclaimer: All materials on this site are for informational purposes only. None of the material should be interpreted as investment advice. Please note that despite the nature of much of the material created and hosted on this website, HODL FM is not a financial reference resource, and the opinions of authors and other contributors are their own and should not be taken as financial advice. If you require advice. HODL FM strongly recommends contacting a qualified industry professional.