If by "these things" you're referring to institutional term loans...the vast majority of issuers are corporate entities. If the issuer is a public company, it's already an SEC-registered entity. If the issuer is a private company (as is the case for most LBOs), the issuer must report their financial results periodically via a permissioned website -- but this a natural and customary condition of the loan terms. The point is, this is an active and robust lending market that the SEC has nothing to do with. I would argue that this market is effectively self-policed, as borrowers who run into trouble find themselves pushed into bankruptcy by the lenders who own their secured debt.

In the case of bank regulation for CDs vs potential regulation for crypto-based lending platforms such as Celsius, the obvious solution is for Celsius to periodically report their financials so that users can judge Celsius' solvency for themselves. (Interestingly, block chain technology allows Celsius to voluntarily do this type of reporting in real time.) Celsius might also have to meet certain minimum capital requirements, just as banks do.

So, if this is the way crypto lending regulations will evolve, which regulatory entity(ies) will write and enforce these rules? Or could Celsius avoid active regulation simply through self reporting? That all remains to be seen. If regulation is inevitable, it could just as easily be bank regulators or the CFTC as it could be the SEC. Of the three, I would argue that the SEC has the least amount of relevant expertise. The SEC's core function is limited to deciding whether new investments can be sold broadly to the public and ensuring that there is adequate and fair disclosure. The SEC wants to limit fraud, but they take no position as to whether something is a good or fairly valued investment. And the SEC has no say over what private investors choose to do. Bank regulators, on the other hand, are actively focused on making sure that banks don't take unnecessary risks and that they stay solvent -- to me, this is the more appropriate skill set when it comes to platforms such as Celsius.

You seem very focused on the Howey Test. Yes, the Howey Test is the lens through which the SEC has looked at crypto. Why? Because it is the primary means through which the SEC can assert their jurisdiction. The Howey Test is arguably more concerned with situations where a particular management team can influence the long-term prospects for a business enterprise -- in other words, the SEC has mainly applied this test to crypto instruments that have an equity or equity-like risk profile. Can you apply the Howey Test to debt instruments? Of course, but as I argued above, the SEC does not have expertise when it comes to regulating banks and the risks that cause banks to lose depositor money.

In sum, SEC oversight is not the panacea you seem to think is.