While Friday’s SEC Crypto Task Force Roundtable was a refreshing change from the prior administration’s “regulation for enforcement” approach, it focused on yesterday’s problems instead of proposals that could shape the legislative framework that controls crypto in the future.

Since 1946 the question of whether a product is a “security” or “item” has been governed by the Supreme Court’s decision in Sec v. WJ Howey Co. Courts have struggled to uniform to use the “Howey” test of digital assets, which should not be surprising because it is a decades old decision on Citruslunde.

Digital assets do not fit clean in either the “security” or “raw material” bucket. They are something brand new. But the distinction between securities and raw materials means under the law because SEC regulates securities and CFTC regulates products that include raw materials.

Congress is considering new legislation similar to last year’s Fit21 Bill proposal. This legislation will move past the outdated Howey test and define sharply how specific digital assets are classified.

Friday’s round table, which included a dozen or such prominent crypto -attorneys, along with members of SEC’s crypto -task force, should have served as a jumping off point for ideas and suggestions that SEC could use as input to legislators considering the new regulatory framework for crypto. But instead, much of the discussion on year-old debates about the four-party’s Howy testing and philosophical discussions about the nature of securities.

To be sure, some participants in Roundtable – such as A16Z General Counsel Miles Jennings – made important proposals, such as Jennings’ call to focus on economic reality rather than the legal relationship between the issuer and the investor. But much of the panel’s time was spent discussing everything from Bitcoin’s use in Ransomware -attacks to SEC’s recent staff guidance on Meme coins. Give SEC and CFTC are likely to share regulatory authority over digital assets in any new legislation, the line between the two regulators is very important for the crypto industry. The goal must be the creation of clear rules that issuers can follow to ensure compliance, whether their token is considered to be a “security” or a “item.”

While welcoming commissioner Hester Peirce’s creation of Roundtable along with her distinctive openness and transparency, Friday’s Roundtable was missing the opportunity. She should have invited CFTC acting chairman Caroline Pham and her team to attend or at least participate. CFTC was not mentioned once under the round table, and the crypto industry needs SEC and CFTC to work together in the coming years.

Congress goes ahead with its own answer to the question of when digital assets are securities, regardless of whether SEC decides to give Congress any input. For the sake of the crypto industry, I hope that Commissioner Peirce’s next round table is focused on promoting ideas that will inform the legislation that will shape the industry in the coming years.