Block News International

@2025 Block News International. All Rights Reserved.

Blends Media
A Blends Media Group Production

SEC Delays Trump-Linked Truth Social ETF amid rising political tensions

Arry Hashemi
Arry Hashemi
Aug. 19, 2025
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission has signaled further caution in the burgeoning crypto exchange-traded fund (ETF) market by extending its deadline to decide on a controversial application from Truth Social parent company Trump Media & Technology Group. Simultaneously, the regulator has postponed decisions on several altcoin-based ETF bids, underscoring its persistent prudence amid evolving digital asset scrutiny.
TrumpSEC extends review of Trump-backed Truth Social ETF. (Brian Jason/Shutterstock)

Initially scheduled for an early August decision, the SEC has officially designated September 18, 2025, as the verdict deadline for the proposed Truth Social Bitcoin and Ethereum ETF, an investment vehicle backed by the social media platform founded by President Trump. This extension grants the regulator additional time to scrutinise compliance, market risk, and the politically-charged nature of the proposal.

On June 24, 2025, NYSE Arca filed a Form 19b-4 with the SEC to list the Truth Social Bitcoin and Ethereum ETF under Rule 8.201-E, allowing it to operate as a commodity-based trust. The fund is designed to maintain a 3-to-1 allocation, approximately 75 % Bitcoin and 25 % Ethereum, likely with periodic rebalancing. The SEC has since delayed its decision, stating it requires “sufficient time to consider the proposed rule change and the issues raised therein,” and has pushed the verdict deadline to September 18, 2025.

Beyond Truth Social, the SEC has postponed decisions on a number of other high-profile crypto ETF applications. Grayscale’s attempt to convert its Solana Trust into an ETF has been pushed back, with the regulator assigning October 10 as the new deadline.

The SEC’s move comes amid heightened regulatory debate and political scrutiny. Truth Social’s ETF application has drawn intense attention, as approval would mark one of the first crypto investment products directly tied to a sitting U.S. president's enterprise. Some lawmakers, such as Senator Jeff Merkley, have warned about potential "abuse of power", asserting that allowing such a fund could create conflicts between political influence and financial markets.

Under SEC Chair Paul S. Atkins, the Commission made a significant policy shift by approving in-kind creations and redemptions for crypto ETPs, a move that brings these products in line with traditional commodity ETP structures and promises improved efficiency and reduced costs. However, despite this pro-crypto-friendly adjustment, the SEC continues to demonstrate a deliberate and methodical approach in reviewing ETF proposals, often leveraging the full allowable review periods—even for high-profile altcoin-backed applications.

September 18 is shaping up to be a crucial date for the Truth Social ETF, as the SEC’s ruling could determine whether the politically linked fund secures approval or faces further delay. Its outcome may carry weight well beyond the product itself, testing how the regulator handles applications tied to prominent political figures.

Soon after, attention will shift to a series of decisions on altcoin ETFs, including proposals for Solana, XRP, and Litecoin. These rulings, expected through mid to late October, could have a profound impact on the wider crypto ETF market by broadening the range of digital assets accessible to mainstream investors.

If the Truth Social fund is approved, it may set a precedent for politically affiliated financial instruments, heightening concerns about regulatory independence. Meanwhile, the SEC’s adoption of in-kind ETP creation and redemption tools signals an effort to modernize infrastructure, even as the agency maintains a deliberate pace on new approvals.

The SEC’s extended timeline for the Truth Social Bitcoin and Ethereum ETF and similar delays affecting altcoin-based proposals, reflects a confluence of factors: structural caution, political sensitivity, and a methodical regulatory posture under Chair Atkins.