Securitize Launches Tokenized US Stocks on Solana with Full Shareholder Rights

Securitize has launched tokenized US equities on Solana, giving investors on-chain exposure to household names including Apple, Microsoft, Nvidia, Alphabet, Tesla, Meta, and Amazon, with SpaceX, Palantir, Circle, and Strategy also expected to be added. The tokens are backed 1:1 by actual shares held through Securitize Markets' regulated brokerage, settle in USDC, and carry full shareholder rights including dividends and corporate-action entitlements. For accounting firms, auditors, and CFOs already managing digital asset portfolios, this launch is not a niche crypto story — it is a securities-plus-digital-asset classification problem arriving at scale, and the time to build a treatment framework is now, before positions accumulate.

What the Convertible Entitlement Token Actually Is

Securitize's vehicle for this launch is a structure called the Convertible Entitlement Token, or CET. Understanding the mechanics is the starting point for every downstream accounting and tax decision.

The 1:1 Backing Mechanism

Each CET represents a claim on one underlying share held by Securitize Markets, the firm's registered broker-dealer. The share itself does not leave the regulated brokerage environment. What moves on-chain is a tokenized entitlement to that share's economic and governance rights. Holders receive applicable dividends, are entitled to corporate-action distributions, and carry voting or other shareholder rights as they would through a conventional brokerage account. Settlement between counterparties occurs in USDC rather than through the traditional T+1 (or T+2 legacy) central-clearing model.

The Issuer-Sponsored Transition Pathway

The "Convertible" in CET is deliberate. Securitize has stated that if a listed company subsequently adopts an issuer-sponsored tokenized share structure on Securitize's platform, existing CET positions can transition directly into that model without requiring the holder to sell and re-purchase. This forward compatibility clause matters for long-term accounting treatment: a position that begins as a CET wrapper could, in the future, become a native on-chain equity security issued directly by the company. Any transition event would need to be assessed for disposal or reclassification triggers under applicable standards.

Settlement in USDC and Extended Hours Trading

The initial launch supports extended US market hours, with Securitize planning to move toward 24/7 trading over time. Settlement in USDC introduces a second digital asset into every transaction leg: the equity-side CET and the stablecoin-side USDC. Both instruments need to appear correctly in the general ledger, which means firms cannot treat this as a simple equity trade with a USD cash leg — there is a tokenized cash instrument on one side of each settlement.

Regulatory and Market Context

Securitize's Regulated Infrastructure

Securitize Markets operates as a registered broker-dealer, which gives the CET structure a level of regulatory grounding that many earlier tokenized-equity experiments lacked. The company also notably became the first to list its own shares both on the New York Stock Exchange and on-chain — launching SECZ tokens on Solana and Avalanche simultaneously. That precedent matters: it demonstrates that the SEC has, at minimum, not objected to this dual-listing approach for Securitize's own securities, lending credibility to the broader CET framework.

Liquidity Arrangements

Securitize tapped Jump and Jupiter to provide liquidity and market access for the stock tokenization effort. Jump is a well-known institutional market maker; Jupiter is Solana's leading decentralized exchange aggregator. The combination signals that Securitize is targeting both institutional and on-chain DeFi liquidity pools, which has implications for transaction traceability and counterparty identification — both of which are relevant to AML compliance and audit trail requirements.

Tokenized Equities at Scale

This launch arrives as the broader tokenized-stock market has been growing, with Securitize accounting for a meaningful share of recent capital inflows. The convergence of regulated issuance infrastructure, major-name underlying stocks, and a high-throughput blockchain (Solana processes transactions at significantly lower cost and higher speed than most alternatives) makes this a structurally significant step rather than another proof-of-concept. For a deeper look at how another tokenized-stock venue is approaching market structure, see how the OKX and ICE tokenized stock venue shapes market structure.

Accounting Treatment: the Core Questions

The CET structure does not map cleanly onto any single existing asset category. Firms using crypto accounting software or digital asset accounting software need to resolve several classification questions before the first position hits the books.

Equity Security or Digital Asset?

Under US GAAP, the substance-over-form principle would generally lead to treating a CET as an equity security rather than a cryptocurrency or digital asset, given that it represents a 1:1 claim on a regulated brokerage-held share with full economic rights. ASC 321 (equity securities with readily determinable fair values) is the most likely landing point for most holders, meaning fair-value-through-net-income measurement applies. Under IFRS 9, the same logic applies: the instrument is a financial asset representing a residual interest in an entity, so classification as an equity instrument measured at fair value through profit or loss (FVTPL) — or through other comprehensive income (FVOCI) if the irrevocable election is made — would be the starting position.

However, the token wrapper itself — the on-chain CET — may sit in a jurisdiction or accounting context where digital asset rules apply first. Firms should document the basis for their classification choice, noting the regulated brokerage backing, shareholder-rights pass-through, and 1:1 collateralization as the substantive features driving the equity-security treatment. This documentation will matter at audit.

USDC Settlement Legs

Every CET purchase or sale involves a USDC leg. If USDC is treated as a digital asset (as most US GAAP preparers currently do, under the ASC 350-60 intangible-asset framework or the emerging fair-value option), then each settlement creates a second measurement event. A firm buying Apple CETs with USDC needs to record: (1) the disposal of USDC at its carrying value, recognizing any gain or loss on that stablecoin position, and (2) the acquisition of the CET at cost. Depending on USDC's carrying value versus its USD peg at settlement, a de minimis gain or loss may arise on the stablecoin leg. Robust crypto bookkeeping software should be configured to capture both legs automatically.

Dividend and Corporate Action Recognition

Because CET holders receive dividends and corporate-action entitlements, dividend income recognition policy needs to be extended to cover on-chain positions. The practical complication is timing: dividends from underlying shares may be distributed through Securitize's brokerage infrastructure before being passed to token holders, creating a potential lag between the ex-dividend date (which determines income recognition under most policies) and the date cash or stablecoins actually arrive in the holder's wallet. Firms should establish a clear policy for recognizing dividend receivables for CET positions and confirm with Securitize's reporting how corporate actions (stock splits, spin-offs, rights issues) will be communicated and reflected in token balances.

Custody and Balance Sheet Presentation

CETs held at a Securitize-connected wallet or custodian are not held in the firm's own name on a traditional share register — the underlying shares are held by Securitize Markets' brokerage. This intermediated custody model means that, in a stressed scenario (broker insolvency, for example), the firm's claim is against Securitize Markets as a regulated broker, not directly against the issuing company. Balance sheet footnotes should disclose the custodial arrangement, and credit risk on the broker should be assessed, particularly for large positions.

Tax Implications for US Holders

Equity Character and Capital Gains

If the IRS treats a CET as a direct ownership interest in the underlying stock — which the 1:1 backing and shareholder-rights pass-through would support — then the holding-period and capital-gains framework for equities would apply. A CET held for more than 12 months before disposal would qualify for long-term capital gains rates. The acquisition date for holding-period purposes should be the date the CET was purchased, not the date the underlying share was originally acquired by Securitize's brokerage.

USDC Settlement and the Two-Transaction Problem

As noted in the accounting section, settling a CET purchase in USDC creates two taxable events under current IRS guidance (Notice 2014-21 and subsequent guidance treating virtual currency as property). Selling USDC to acquire a CET triggers recognition of any gain or loss on the USDC position. Firms with high-volume trading in CETs will accumulate a large number of stablecoin disposal events, each requiring cost-basis tracking. This is precisely the scenario where purpose-built digital asset accounting software pays for itself in time saved and error reduction.

Dividend Tax Treatment

Dividends passed through a CET should retain their qualified-dividend character if they originate from a US corporation and the holding period requirements are met at both the Securitize brokerage level and the CET holder level. The interaction between the two holding periods — Securitize's brokerage holds the underlying share, but the relevant holder for dividend-qualification purposes is the CET owner — has not yet been addressed in formal IRS guidance. Until clarification is issued, conservative advisors may treat CET dividends as ordinary income and document the reasoning.

International Holders and Withholding

For non-US holders, US-source dividends on the underlying shares would normally attract a 30% withholding tax (reduced by treaty). Whether Securitize's brokerage infrastructure passes through treaty-rate withholding based on the CET holder's tax residency — as a traditional US broker would under a completed W-8 form — is a practical question that international investors and their advisors should confirm directly with Securitize before acquiring positions. The ECB has also flagged broader fragmentation risks in tokenized markets that could affect cross-border positions; for context, see what the ECB's tokenization fragmentation warning means for global portfolios.

Compliance and Audit Considerations for Firms

AML and Counterparty Risk

CETs settle on Solana via USDC, meaning on-chain transaction data is publicly available and traceable. Firms subject to Bank Secrecy Act obligations — including registered investment advisers and broker-dealers — should confirm that their AML program covers Solana-based settlement activity. The involvement of a decentralized exchange aggregator (Jupiter) in the liquidity stack means that some CET trades may route through DeFi pools, potentially complicating counterparty identification. Compliance teams should review whether their transaction-monitoring tools cover Solana and USDC flows.

Audit Trail and Reconciliation

A key advantage of on-chain settlement is the immutable public ledger, which provides an auditable transaction record at the blockchain level. The challenge for auditors is reconciling that on-chain record against Securitize's off-chain brokerage records for the underlying shares, and then against the firm's own general ledger. Firms should request from Securitize a clear data-feed specification showing how CET balances, dividends, and corporate actions will be reported, and confirm that this can be ingested into their crypto accounting software without manual restatement.

Frequently Asked Questions

Is a CET the same as owning the underlying stock directly?

Economically, yes: the 1:1 backing means you have a claim on one real share with the same dividend and corporate-action rights. Legally, the shares are held by Securitize Markets' regulated brokerage on your behalf, so your direct counterparty is the broker, not the issuing company's share registry. Most accounting standards would still treat this as an equity security rather than a digital asset, but firms should document their classification rationale carefully.

How should USDC used to settle CET trades be treated for tax purposes?

Under current IRS guidance, USDC is property. Disposing of USDC to buy a CET is a taxable event: any gain or loss on the USDC position must be recognized at the point of exchange. Firms running high volumes of CET trades should ensure their digital asset accounting software captures each USDC disposal with its cost basis to avoid under-reporting.

What happens to a CET position if the issuing company adopts an issuer-sponsored tokenized share structure?

Securitize has stated that CET positions can transition into an issuer-sponsored model if the company adopts one. Whether that transition constitutes a taxable disposal — an exchange of one instrument for another — or a non-taxable reclassification is not yet addressed in IRS guidance. Until it is, the conservative treatment is to treat it as a disposal and reacquisition, recognizing any embedded gain or loss at transition.

Do CETs qualify for long-term capital gains treatment?

If the IRS respects the equity character of the instrument, yes — a CET held for more than 12 months should qualify for long-term capital gains rates on disposal. The holding period clock should start on the purchase date of the CET, not the date Securitize's brokerage first acquired the underlying share. Formal IRS guidance on this specific point has not been issued, so advisors should flag it as an open position.

What should non-US investors check before buying CETs?

The primary concern is withholding tax on US-source dividends. Non-US investors should confirm with Securitize whether treaty-rate withholding will be applied based on their tax residency and what documentation (equivalent to a W-8BEN or W-8BEN-E) is required. They should also check whether holding a CET — rather than a direct brokerage account — affects their ability to claim treaty benefits under the beneficial ownership rules of their applicable tax treaty.

Source: The Block