# kaal:claim:4021599-021

**Claim.** Merely calling a token a utility token, or structuring it so that it provides some utility, does not prevent the token from being characterized as a security.

**Type.** failure  **Support.** argued

**Holds when.**

- United States regulatory characterization

**Source quote.**

> From a regulatory perspective, merely calling a token a utility token or structuring it to provide some utility does not prevent the token from being characterized as a security.34 According to SEC

**From.** Wulf A. Kaal, *Securities Versus Utility Tokens* (2022), III. General Characteristics of Utility Tokens, page 11

**Cite as.** Wulf A. Kaal, Securities Versus Utility Tokens (2022). SSRN: https://ssrn.com/abstract=4021599

**Verify.** sha256 of source PDF `bb03790af46b3710e306121cfae25f850e3e7477e0f95313af42b9feeb6bc0c4` at https://raw.githubusercontent.com/wulfkaal/Academic-Papers/main/papers/pdf/Kaal%20-%202022%20-%20Securities%20Versus%20Utility%20Tokens.pdf

**Failure mode.** utility-label-does-not-defeat-security-status  (family: definitional-ambiguity)

**Topics.** tokenomics, securities-law

**Keywords.** utility-token, regulatory-characterization, securities-law, labeling

**Related claims.**

- restates: https://wulfkaal.github.io/claims/3117224-028

**Canonical form.** This markdown file is the canonical hashed representation of the claim. Its sha256 is the content hash used for attestation.