The US Securities and Exchange Commission has tightened its staff guidance for crypto token buybacks just three days after publishing it, adding a condition that could reshape how projects structure repurchase programs at a time when buyback spending has reached a record $638 million.

On Sept. 25, SEC staff said a token issuer could announce a buyback without that announcement being treated as a promise to manage the token's value, provided the crypto system was already functional. On Sept. 28, the agency revised that answer in its Crypto Assets FAQ: the system must also have "no central party." Under the updated staff position, a buyback announcement for a non-security crypto asset would not, by itself, amount to a promise of essential managerial efforts only when the system is both functional and free of a central controlling entity.

If the system is not yet functional, staff said a buyback announcement could count as such a promise if the issuer presents the purchases as a way to generate yield or returns for holders.

The revision carries practical weight because many crypto projects run buybacks while people, companies, or committees still retain some control over how purchases happen. The FAQ reflects staff views; it is not legally binding and does not determine whether any particular token is a security. Still, it forces a question that cumulative buyback figures obscure: who actually decides whether the next purchase happens, how large it is, or whether the program stops.

Crypto projects spent a record $638 million on token buybacks through late August, according to previous CryptoSlate reporting.

The central-party test

The SEC defined "central party" in its March crypto-asset interpretation as a person, company, or group holding operational, economic, or voting control over a crypto system. A decentralized system operates without that control.

The definition applies to the system as a whole. Control over a project's treasury or buyback program does not automatically create a central party, but it can serve as one piece of evidence when regulators assess economic control. The operative question is not whether some buying happens automatically through smart contracts, but whether people retain meaningful power over the system's economic decisions.

Pump.fun illustrates the split. In an April 28 disclosure, the platform said references to PUMP purchases and a "buyback program" generally described plans or smart-contract functions rather than firm commitments, with an exception for purchases already programmed to execute automatically via on-chain code deployed before April 28, 2026 UTC. The platform also said statements about using roughly 50% of platform revenue for token purchases were estimates, not guarantees, and that third parties could carry out some purchases.

Its PUMP token page says 50% of defined platform revenue was programmatically locked and allocated to be burned for one year beginning April 28, while also noting that future purchases can generally be started, stopped, or changed unless already automated. The two disclosures use slightly different cutoff dates for the automatic category — April 28 versus April 29. None of this establishes whether Pump.fun has a central party under the SEC's definition; that answer requires examining control over the wider system, not buybacks alone.

Aave's discretionary pause

Aave shows discretion in action. In a Feb. 28 funding update, DAO service provider TokenLogic said the Aave Finance Committee could adjust weekly AAVE buyback volumes within a 75% range, based on liquidity, market volatility, timing, and protocol revenue. TokenLogic said the DAO had allocated $42 million to buy more than 205,000 AAVE during the program's first 10 months.

The committee exercised that discretion in April. An April 22 governance notice said AAVE buybacks had been paused from April 19, following an rsETH bridge incident the previous day. TokenLogic said the pause was intended to give the treasury flexibility while the incident's consequences were assessed, with any restart to be announced through a normal funding update.

A later August/September funding update included AAVE among assets purchasable through updated token budgets, but it did not clearly state that buybacks had restarted or provide a record of completed purchases after the pause.

Neither example settles the central-party question — the SEC's test examines control over the entire system. But for issuers calibrating disclosure against the revised FAQ, the operative inquiry is now straightforward: who can start, stop, or change the next purchase, and what other power do they hold. Projects relying on discretionary committees should expect closer scrutiny of buyback disclosures as staff guidance continues to evolve.