Nearly a year ago, we published an open letter reflecting the views of crypto law regulators and outlining practical and achievable steps the next administration could take to make the United States the crypto capital of the world. The goal was not to promote cryptocurrencies as an ideology, but to convey the perspective of lawyers working in the field about how thoughtful regulatory policies can unleash innovation and ensure that the next generation of financial and internet infrastructure is built on American soil.
On the anniversary of this letter, and with the Market Structure Bill in jeopardy, it is worth reflecting on. The past year has been a uniquely eventful year for U.S. crypto policy, and in many ways the pace and scope of progress has exceeded even our hopeful predictions. This moment calls for a kind of report card that recognizes meaningful accomplishments and identifies the challenges that remain for the United States to maintain and further strengthen its leadership.
inventory
Our letter focused on three major priorities: supporting U.S.-based crypto companies, promoting core crypto values in public policy, and fostering a welcoming domestic business environment for builders and entrepreneurs.
Since then, lawmakers have pushed forward-looking policies across all three areas. Importantly, much of the progress has come not just through fundamental legal overhauls, but through continued practical work at the agency level that has begun to replace years of uncertainty with a more consistent regulatory posture. The work is not done yet, but the overall direction is definitely positive.
Support for US-based companies (Letter grade: A-)
Our letter emphasized that U.S.-based crypto companies need clear and durable rules to compete globally. Although we argued that market structuring methods are essential, we also highlighted some specific areas such as stablecoins, decentralized finance, and the integration of traditional finance. These areas could benefit significantly from tailored regulatory attention.
Significant progress has been made on this front.
General rules of the road
Momentum continues for a comprehensive market structure bill, with Congress poised to clarify the respective roles of securities regulators and commodity regulators in crypto markets, but has recently stalled over disagreements over stablecoin yields. Although the final legal framework has not yet been developed, the direction is clear. No longer a regulatory nuisance, public blockchains are set to become a permanent part of the U.S. financial system, worthy of their own fit-for-purpose rules. As lawmakers near the final stage of their market structure bill, we encourage them and the industry to resolve remaining disagreements in favor of open and innovative use cases, rather than entrenching the benefits of existing crypto intermediaries such as centralized exchanges. Although this bill is not perfect, the diversity of industry stakeholders supporting it confirms that it is strong enough and urgent enough to pass.
stable coin
The progress here is particularly significant. The passage of the Stablecoin Bill and the start of initial rulemaking brings long-awaited clarity regarding issuance, preparation, and oversight. This would give more U.S. companies a viable path to compete with offshore issuers, while protecting consumers from weak or opaque foreign exchange reserves and strengthening the dollar’s dominance in global digital markets. However, some of these victories are now at risk as big banks seek to reinstate the Genius Act during market structure negotiations. Additionally, regulators need to remain cognizant of disintermediating crypto infrastructure to avoid reducing it to a mere backend for centrally custodial stablecoin issuers.
TradFi integration
The past year has also seen meaningful steps towards integrating crypto infrastructure into traditional financial markets. Banks, fintechs, asset managers and market intermediaries now operate with confidence that responsible engagement with digital assets will not result in knee-jerk regulatory backlash. This opens the door to broader institutional participation, improved market mechanisms, and more resilient financial rails. Unthinkable a year ago, major regulators including the SEC, CFTC, and OCC are preparing for a financial system defined by tokenized securities, new on-chain asset classes, and even decentralized finance, pledging to collaborate on streamlining the regulation of so-called “super apps” across securities and commodity trading and other innovative products.
DeFi
Decentralized finance remains the most difficult category to regulate, but the debate is maturing. Regulators are increasingly recognizing that DeFi protocols do not fit neatly into frameworks designed for intermediaries, and efforts to distinguish between infrastructure (and its developers) and activities are bearing fruit. However, in codifying administrative standards that distinguish decentralized from centralized finance, lawmakers must be careful not to draw the line so rigidly as to prevent DeFi protocols from adopting basic safety and compliance measures, such as asset curation and sanctions screening, that are necessary to protect users and comply with the law.
Much of this progress can be traced back to extraordinary visionary leadership at the Securities and Exchange Commission. Under new leadership, the SEC moved away from enforcement regulation and toward serious efforts to modernize securities laws for a tokenized world. This change, now supported by the CFTC, has done more than a single policy initiative to restore confidence among U.S. builders. Still, securing these results requires legislation that is insulated from political cycles and changes in agency leadership, and that window is rapidly closing.
Cryptographic value (Letter grade: B+)
Encryption is more than just a set of disruptive technologies. It’s also a very American ideology, rooted in openness, unauthorized innovation, resistance to censorship, and individual autonomy. In our open letter, we argued that this means that cryptocurrencies must be treated like other technologies in certain circumstances and differently in others.
Encouragingly, over the past year, the values of cryptocurrencies have begun to be more clearly articulated in policy discussions and legislative proposals, such as on self-custody rights and privacy. Still, tensions remain. Crypto policy remains oscillated between an enabling instinct and reflexive containment driven by legitimate government concerns about illicit finance, tax evasion, and national security. We believe that crypto-native solutions such as zero-knowledge proofs and portable IDs provide a constructive alternative to well-known regulatory approaches that rely on financial oversight of financial intermediaries.
Over the past year, regulators have made measurable progress in a variety of key areas, such as repealing the IRS DeFi Broker Rule and governing OFAC enforcement, but have continued to lag in other notable areas, such as a comprehensive tax overhaul that does not unfairly penalize cryptocurrencies’ open, permissionless architecture.
Progress here is real, but uneven. Continued industry engagement will be essential to ensure that the value of core cryptocurrencies is not gradually eroded by well-intentioned but blatant regulations aimed at making things easier for regulators and traditional companies. After all, cryptocurrencies were not born to support governments, optimize finances, or streamline applications. Born to set people free. Regulation should not obliterate this core principle by concentrating network sovereignty in the hands of states and closed platforms, thereby sidelining the autonomous communities of builders and users that networks were meant to serve.
Pleasant business environment (Letter grade: B)
A year ago, we argued that regulatory clarity alone is not enough to attract and retain crypto entrepreneurs. Builders also need a predictable, fair and competitive business environment with jurisdictions that are actively engaged in digital asset innovation.
The Administration has made meaningful progress on this front. The tone of the debate changed decisively from one of adversarial to one of engagement. Entrepreneurs are less susceptible to bureaucratic whims and more likely to encounter regulators who engage constructively rather than punitively. Notably, the OCC’s recent decision to grant the National Trust Charter to fintech and stablecoin issuers and the continued debate over skinny master accounts confirm that blockchain-based companies should operate on an equal footing with traditional financial companies.
Still, structural challenges remain. State-by-state fragmentation continues to impose substantial costs on startups. While the overall attitude is more welcoming, it has yet to translate into a truly frictionless environment for early-stage builders. For example, despite the availability of DUNA and 501(c)(4) as domestic token stewards, projects continue to rely on offshore structures for tax reasons and greater certainty of public token sales.
There is room for improvement
Despite the overwhelmingly positive trajectory, the past year also revealed important cautionary lessons.
One development we did not foresee was the extent to which the president’s own family was directly involved in the cryptocurrency market. Our original letter was published just days before the launch of a high-profile meme coin related to the Trump brand. Regardless of what one thinks of meme coins as a category, this episode highlighted the need for clear ethical guardrails to prevent the emergence or actualization of conflicts of interest that could undermine public trust in crypto policy as a whole.
More broadly, the next phase of U.S. crypto leadership will rely less on regulators and more on the builders themselves. Policy opened the door. Now, entrepreneurs are required to experience them first-hand. The coming years will test whether cryptocurrencies can deliver on long-promised use cases such as faster and cheaper payments, open capital markets, user-owned platforms, and programmable financial infrastructure that responds to real economic needs.
Looking to the future
If the past year has proven anything, it’s that progress is possible and when it happens, it’s swift.
The challenge now is to consolidate these gains, complete work on market structure legislation, deepen our commitment to privacy and decentralization, and translate regulatory clarity into tangible economic growth. If builders rise to the occasion, the United States will do more than just host cryptocurrency innovation. It will be its driving force and shape its future.
A year ago, becoming the crypto capital of the world felt purely aspirational. Today, it feels like it’s achievable if lawmakers and industry players remain clear-eyed, principled, and ambitious about what comes next.
Ivo Enchev, Orta Andoni, Steven Rutenberg, Donna Radel
The views expressed and reflected herein are those of the signatories and not necessarily those of the signatories’ employers.
