Holders of $WLFI tokens, issued by Trump-linked World Liberty Financial, have overwhelmingly approved a proposal to make them tradable.

The proposal received 99.94% approval from about 20,900 votes and was posted on the venture’s website on July 9, 2025.

The tokens, first sold last year without trading capabilities, are part of a decentralized finance platform that grants holders voting rights.

Investors were granted voting rights on certain business decisions, including modifications to the platform’s code.

The ability to trade the tokens is expected to attract more interest from cryptocurrency investors.

Donald Trump reportedly held 15.75 billion of the 100 billion $WLFI tokens, and his family receives 75% of the token sale revenue.

The venture has drawn criticism from Democratic lawmakers over possible conflicts of interest as the Trump family profits while crypto policy is debated.

Further trading details are pending, but tokens held by founders and advisers will remain locked under extended schedules.

🔗 Source: Reuters

🧠 Food for thought

1️⃣ The regulatory patchwork complicates crypto conflicts of interest assessments

The World Liberty token case highlights how cryptocurrency’s complex regulatory environment makes conflict of interest evaluations difficult.

U.S. regulatory authority over cryptocurrencies remains fragmented across multiple agencies. The IRS treats them as property, the SEC views many as securities, and the CFTC considers some as commodities 1.

This fragmentation creates regulatory gaps that make conflict of interest assessments challenging, especially since the World Liberty tokens haven’t been designated as securities by the SEC, exempting them from more stringent disclosure requirements.

The regulatory landscape is actively evolving, with Congress working on multiple bills, including the GENIUS Act and CLARITY Act, that would provide clearer jurisdictional boundaries between the SEC and CFTC for different types of digital assets 2.

These regulatory ambiguities complicate evaluations of potential conflicts when government officials have financial interests in the space they’re regulating.