Regulators Sprint to Code the Crypto Future Before It Races Away

State and federal regulators in the United States are intensifying efforts to establish a clear and comprehensive legal framework for the rapidly evolving crypto asset market, with calls for urgent legislative action to secure the country’s global leadership in digital finance. At the forefront of this push is the Wyoming Symposium, where experts and policymakers have emphasized that the U.S. must enact robust regulations to avoid losing its competitive edge in the global crypto race. This urgency is underscored by the parallel developments in the European Union with the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regulation, which has already begun reshaping market dynamics on the other side of the Atlantic.

The U.S. regulatory landscape is currently in a period of transformation, with the Biden administration having signed the GENIUS Act into law in July 2025. This act establishes a federal framework specifically for payment stablecoins, which are digital tokens designed to maintain a 1:1 peg to a reference currency such as the U.S. dollar. The law mandates that only “permitted issuers” can issue payment stablecoins in the U.S. after a three-year phase-in period, ensuring strict compliance with reserve, redemption, and transparency requirements. This act is part of a broader strategy to integrate crypto assets into the traditional financial system under a regulatory regime that prioritizes innovation and consumer protection.

Complementing these legislative efforts, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has launched “Project Crypto,” an initiative aimed at modernizing the agency’s regulatory framework to accommodate digital assets. SEC Chairman Paul Atkins has emphasized the need for clear, simple rules of the road for crypto asset distributions, custody, and trading. The agency has already taken steps to roll back restrictive policies from the previous administration, including withdrawing SAB 121, a controversial accounting rule for entities handling crypto assets, and permitting a number of crypto-related IPOs and de-SPAC transactions.

Alongside the SEC, the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) has also announced a “Crypto Sprint,” focusing on implementing recommendations from the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets. The initiative aims to enable CFTC-registered exchanges to list spot crypto asset contracts for trading, signaling the agency’s intent to expand its role in the crypto ecosystem. These coordinated actions reflect a unified regulatory approach that is beginning to take shape across federal agencies, all of which are working to align with the administration’s goal of making the U.S. the “Crypto Capital of the World.”

However, the path to a cohesive regulatory framework is not without challenges. State securities regulators, represented by the North American Securities Administrators Association (NASAA), have expressed concerns that federal initiatives, such as the Responsible Financial Innovation Act (RFIA), could inadvertently limit their authority to enforce anti-fraud measures. NASAA has urged Congress to preserve broad state enforcement powers by including the Support Anti-Fraud Enforcement Act (SAFE Act) in any final legislation. The association argues that states have a long-standing role in investor protection and that federal preemption could undermine their ability to investigate and prosecute crypto-related fraud effectively.

At the same time, industry groups have raised concerns about overly restrictive regulatory proposals, particularly those related to stablecoin issuance and custody requirements. In the U.S., the American Bankers Association and other financial industry bodies have called for amendments to the GENIUS Act to address potential loopholes that could allow crypto exchanges to indirectly pay interest on stablecoins, a practice they argue could destabilize the market. Similarly, in Hong Kong, stablecoin issuers have criticized the Hong Kong Monetary Authority’s (HKMA) stringent Know Your Customer (KYC) requirements as impractical and potentially prohibitive for new market entrants. These critiques highlight the ongoing debate about the appropriate balance between regulatory rigor and market flexibility.

The regulatory landscape is further complicated by the emergence of cross-border regulatory initiatives. In the European Union, the implementation of MiCA has already begun to influence market behavior, with notable negative impacts observed around key regulatory milestones such as the adoption of the framework by the EU and its publication in the EU Official Journal. The European Banking Authority (EBA) has also proposed technical standards for how EU banks should calculate capital requirements for crypto-asset exposures, aligning with Basel standards and the MiCA framework. These efforts aim to standardize risk treatment across different types of crypto assets, from stablecoins to unbacked tokens like Bitcoin.

The contrast between the U.S. and EU regulatory approaches is significant. While MiCA is a broad, EU-wide framework that applies to a wide range of crypto assets and service providers, the GENIUS Act is more narrowly focused, targeting only payment stablecoins. This divergence reflects differing national priorities and regulatory philosophies, with the U.S. emphasizing innovation and market access while the EU prioritizes consumer protection and financial stability.

Despite these differences, both regulatory frameworks are shaping market behavior in similar ways. For example, both MiCA and the GENIUS Act impose stringent reserve and disclosure requirements on stablecoin issuers, ensuring that these tokens are backed by safe, liquid assets and that holders are provided with clear and transparent information. These requirements are intended to prevent the kind of instability and investor losses that have historically been associated with the crypto market.

Looking ahead, the next phase of crypto regulation in the U.S. is expected to focus on formal rulemaking and the passage of broader market structure legislation. The CLARITY Act, which was passed by the House, and the RFIA, which is under consideration in the Senate, both aim to establish a comprehensive regulatory framework for digital assets. These bills seek to clarify the jurisdictional boundaries between the SEC and CFTC and to define the regulatory responsibilities for different types of crypto assets. However, the path to enactment is likely to be contentious, with ongoing negotiations expected over key provisions such as the definition of a “security” and the role of state regulators.

In the short term, the focus is on administrative actions such as no-action relief and guidance, which allow regulators to provide clarity without the need for lengthy legislative processes. These actions are expected to be followed by more formal rulemaking efforts, which will be subject to the notice-and-comment requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act. Over the longer term, the goal is to achieve a durable regulatory framework that can withstand changes in political administrations and provide a stable environment for market participants.

The U.S. regulatory push for a clear and consistent legal framework for crypto assets is part of a broader global trend. As countries around the world compete to establish themselves as leaders in the digital finance space, the U.S. has taken a proactive stance, with the Trump administration’s executive orders and legislative efforts aimed at fostering innovation while ensuring investor protection. This approach is in contrast to the more cautious and risk-averse strategies adopted by some other jurisdictions, where regulatory uncertainty continues to hinder market development.

As the crypto asset market continues to evolve, the importance of a well-crafted regulatory framework cannot be overstated. The U.S. and EU are setting the stage for a new era of digital finance, with regulatory clarity and investor confidence emerging as key factors in determining the success of this transition. The coming months and years will be critical in shaping the future of the crypto asset market, with the outcome of legislative and regulatory efforts likely to have far-reaching implications for market participants, investors, and financial institutions alike.

Source:

[1] State Securities Regulators Stake a Claim in Crypto Asset Markets | Insights | Sidley Austin LLP (https://www.sidley.com/en/insights/newsupdates/2025/08/state-securities-regulators-stake-a-claim-in-crypto-asset-markets)

[2] Crypto's Integration Into The Traditional Financial System Is Underway | Davis Polk (https://www.davispolk.com/insights/client-update/cryptos-integration-traditional-financial-system-underway)

[3] Finance Industry Bodies Call for Changes to Crypto Rules for Banks | Reuters (https://www.reuters.com/legal/government/finance-industry-bodies-call-changes-crypto-rules-banks-2025-08-19/)

[4] Impact of the Mica Regulation on Crypto-Asset Markets Activity: An Event Study Approach | SSRN (https://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=5393753)

[5] MiCA vs. GENIUS Act: How Crypto Laws Differ in Europe and the US | CCN (https://www.ccn.com/education/crypto/mica-vs-genius-act-how-crypto-laws-differ-in-europe-and-the-us/)