A token, by itself, connects to nothing
Minting a token that says 'this represents one square foot of a building' does not, on its own, create any actual claim on that building. A smart contract has no legal authority, it cannot hold a property deed, sign a lease, or be recognized by a court as the owner of real estate or a bond. For an RWA token to represent a genuine claim, there has to be a real-world legal structure sitting behind it that actually owns the asset and is contractually obligated to treat token holders as its beneficial owners. This is usually done through a special purpose vehicle (SPV) or a trust: a legal entity is created specifically to hold the underlying asset, and its governing documents state that ownership interests in that entity correspond, one to one, with the tokens issued on-chain.
This means every RWA tokenization project has two layers that both have to work: the on-chain layer, where tokens are minted, transferred, and tracked, and the off-chain legal layer, where the SPV or trust actually holds the deed, the bond, or the commodity, and is bound by paperwork to honor token holders' claims. The token is essentially a technical representation of a membership interest or beneficial ownership stake in that legal entity. If the legal wrapper is done properly, transferring the token really does transfer the underlying economic and legal claim. If it's done poorly, or not enforced, the token can look identical on-chain while being legally meaningless.