Deep Dive Special: White House Digital Asset Markets Report

Briefing: Strengthening American Leadership in Digital Financial Technology

Executive Summary

This briefing outlines the Trump Administration's policy to "support the responsible growth and use of digital assets, blockchain technology, and related technologies across all sectors of the economy." (p. 1) This approach marks a significant shift from the previous administration's "regulation by enforcement" which allegedly drove innovation overseas. The Report emphasizes promoting U.S. dollar sovereignty through stablecoins, ensuring regulatory clarity, and protecting individual privacy while countering illicit finance. It also details an ambitious agenda for legislative and regulatory reforms across market structure, banking, stablecoins, illicit finance, and taxation, with a strong emphasis on fostering U.S. leadership in the global digital asset space.

I. Introduction and Policy Principles

The Trump Administration views digital assets and blockchain technologies as revolutionary, capable of transforming not just America's financial system but "systems of ownership and governance economy-wide." (p. 4) The Report highlights significant investor optimism and venture capital deployment in the crypto space following the change in administration, contrasting it with the "regulatory overreach" and "Operation Choke Point 2.0" of the Biden Administration, which allegedly "debanks the industry" and "nearly eliminated the opportunity for the United States to lead in this revolutionary technology due to mere political whims." (p. 4)

The core policy recommendations are:

* Protecting Individual Liberty and Private Sector Access: Affirming the right to self-custody digital assets, participate in open public blockchain networks without persecution, and engage in lawful peer-to-peer transactions. (p. 1)

* Promoting U.S. Dollar Sovereignty: Through the development and growth of lawful, legitimate dollar-backed stablecoins worldwide. (p. 1)

* Fair and Open Access to Banking Services: Ensuring all law-abiding citizens and entities have access to banking services. (p. 1)

* Regulatory Clarity and Certainty: Built on technology-neutral regulations, frameworks accounting for emerging technologies, transparent decision-making, and well-defined jurisdictional boundaries. (p. 1)

* Prohibiting Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs): Taking measures to protect Americans from CBDCs, which "threaten the stability of the financial system, individual privacy, and the sovereignty of the United States." (p. 1) The Executive Order 14178 explicitly prohibits the establishment, issuance, circulation, and use of a CBDC within U.S. jurisdiction. (p. 1)

The President's Working Group on Digital Asset Markets (Working Group), chaired by the Special Advisor for AI and Crypto, is tasked with recommending regulatory and legislative proposals to advance these policies. (p. 2)

II. Digital Asset Ecosystem Overview

The digital asset ecosystem has grown exponentially since Bitcoin's launch in 2009, evolving from a niche interest to a multi-trillion-dollar market. A digital asset is defined as "any digital representation of value that is recorded on a distributed ledger." (p. 14) Key characteristics of blockchain technology include distributed ledgers, cryptographic linking, automated distribution of updates, and publicly available source code. (p. 14)

Key Market Participants:

* Issuers: Create and distribute digital assets, ranging from tech startups to traditional financial institutions. (p. 18)

* Retail Participants: A primary driver of market growth, accessing markets through trading platforms or on-chain applications. (p. 18)

* Institutional Investors: Increasingly participating through financial investment in assets/protocols, venture investment in companies, and in-house product/service development. (p. 19) The approval of crypto ETPs (Exchange-Traded Products) in early 2024 by the SEC has significantly increased institutional exposure. (p. 16)

* Centralized Trading Platforms (CEXs): Facilitate spot trading of digital assets off-chain, often offering vertically integrated services like custody, trading, and brokerage. They are generally subject to state money transmitter laws and federal money services business (MSB) regulations under the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). (p. 19-20)

* Decentralized Protocols (DeFi): Utilize smart contracts to automate transactions and enforce transparent rules, enabling peer-to-peer activities like trading and lending. Total Value Locked (TVL) in DeFi protocols approached $130 billion as of July 2025. (p. 20-21) Decentralized exchanges (DEXs) leverage liquidity pools and automated market-making. (p. 22)

* Blockchain Network Support: Includes miners (Proof-of-Work, PoW) and stakers/validators (Proof-of-Stake, PoS) who secure the network and validate transactions, earning rewards and fees. The Report highlights the energy efficiency of PoS compared to PoW. (p. 24-26)

* Infrastructure Providers and Tools: Such as oracles, DEX aggregators, bridge providers, node providers, on-chain data providers, digital identity providers, smart contract auditors, and front-end user interface operators. (p. 27)

Market Activities:

* Issuance: Digital assets are issued through methods like ICOs, airdrops, and forks. The Report notes a lack of a comprehensive federal regulatory framework for non-security digital assets. (p. 31-32)

* Trading: The most common activity, including spot, futures, perpetual contracts, and options on both CEXs and DEXs. (p. 32)

* Custody and Wallets: Users can self-custody (non-custodial wallets) or use digital asset custodians (banks or state-chartered trusts). The Report discusses the security trade-off between "hot" (internet-connected) and "cold" (offline) wallets and the use of multi-signature or multi-party computation for enhanced security. (p. 33-34)

* Lending, Borrowing, and Collateral: Prime brokers offer leverage, and retail investors often borrow against digital asset holdings. DeFi also provides opportunities for collateralized borrowing. (p. 35)

* Commercial Applications: Beyond financial markets, digital assets are used for utility tokens (access to goods/services) and collectible tokens (NFTs). (p. 35)

* Tokenization: The use of blockchain to record ownership of assets, both financial (e.g., money market funds, fixed-income) and non-financial (e.g., art, real estate). "Industry estimates suggest that over $600 billion in 'real world assets' could be tokenized by 2030." (p. 36) The Report stresses that "the regulatory structure of tokenization is determined by what asset is tokenized, not the mere process of tokenizing an asset." (p. 37)

Potential Risks: Consumers and market participants face risks similar to traditional finance, including custody risks (bankruptcy, manipulation, conflict of interest), fraud and cybersecurity risks (coding errors in smart contracts), data privacy risks (public transaction data), and operational risks (system failures, irreversible transactions). (p. 38)

Technical Standards and Post-Quantum Cryptography: The National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) plays a crucial role in developing technical standards. The Report highlights the existential threat quantum computing poses to current cryptographic security, including digital assets, by potentially enabling the derivation of private keys from public keys. NIST's post-quantum cryptography (PQC) standardization project is a key effort, but its adoption across the decentralized digital asset ecosystem faces unique challenges due to the need for consensus among numerous nodes. (p. 39-41) The U.S. must lead in standard-setting to ensure American interests and values are reflected. (p. 41)

III. Digital Asset Market Structure

The Report asserts that "American markets for digital assets need to become the deepest and most liquid in the world" by establishing clear rules. (p. 42) It praises the SEC and CFTC for taking "strong initial steps" since the Trump inauguration to provide clarity, including rescinding SAB No. 121, establishing a Crypto Task Force, abandoning restrictive rule proposals, and refocussing enforcement on fraud. (p. 44)

Establishing a Taxonomy for Digital Assets: A clear and comprehensive classification system is deemed essential due to the current "patchwork of interpretations and guidance." (p. 45) The Report proposes three categories:

* Security Tokens: Digital assets that constitute securities (e.g., equity, bonds, or investment contracts as per the "Howey Test"). These are subject to SEC registration and oversight. (p. 45-47) The SEC has exemptive authority to craft a "fit-for-purpose exemption from registration" and a "time-limited safe harbor" for certain digital assets that may be investment contracts but are not yet fully functional or sufficiently decentralized. (p. 51)

* Commodity Tokens: Many digital assets, like Bitcoin and Ether, are recognized as commodities and fall under CFTC jurisdiction for derivatives. The CFTC has anti-fraud and anti-manipulation enforcement authority in spot markets for such commodities. (p. 47-49)

* Network Tokens: Intrinsically connected to the functioning of a decentralized network (e.g., Bitcoin, Ether), deriving value from network utility rather than profit flows from a managerial entity. The Report suggests that once sufficiently decentralized and functional, these should not be classified as securities. (p. 49)

* Tokens for Commercial and Consumer Use: Provide access to specific goods, services, or privileges, often non-fungible (NFTs) or tied to traditional commercial instruments. Regulation should focus on consumer protection and appropriate disclosures. (p. 49-50)

Enabling the Trading of Digital Assets at the Federal Level: The Report advocates for the SEC and CFTC to use existing authorities to enable trading. This includes:

* SEC Actions: Establishing exemptions for securities distributions, safe harbors for investment contract digital assets, and relief for DeFi service providers from registration requirements. Amendments to Regulation ATS and NMS are also suggested to accommodate digital asset trading, along with modernizing transfer agent rules and clarifying self-hosted wallet provider status. (p. 51-52)

* CFTC Actions: Providing guidance on leveraged spot retail commodity transactions, defining digital assets as commodities, updating rules for commodity pools, collaborating on CIPs, enabling bundled trading and custody, clarifying DeFi applicability, guiding FCMs on segregation, clarifying haircuts for digital assets, and facilitating tokenized non-cash collateral. (p. 52-53)

* Coordination: SEC and CFTC should coordinate on rulemaking, seeking public comment, and establishing regulatory sandboxes or safe harbors with clear criteria and graduation pathways. (p. 53-54)

Creating a Lasting Framework for Digital Asset Market Structure: The Report endorses the House of Representatives’ Digital Asset Market Clarity Act of 2025 (CLARITY) as an "excellent foundation." (p. 54) Key recommendations for Congress in finalizing legislation include:

* Jurisdiction: Granting CFTC clear authority over spot markets in non-security digital assets and permitting SEC and CFTC registrants to engage in multiple business lines under efficient licensing structures. (p. 55)

* Federal Preemption: Federal law should preempt state virtual currency business, "blue sky," and commodity broker laws for SEC- and CFTC-registered intermediaries. (p. 55)

* Market Intermediaries: Subjecting digital asset platforms, brokers, dealers, and custodians to tailored, principles-based registration regimes, allowing lending, netting, and hedging across asset types, and mandating appropriate disclosures (e.g., token economics, source code). (p. 56)

* Custody: Trading platforms should be permitted to custody customer digital assets with appropriate controls (segregation, cybersecurity). (p. 56)

* DeFi Regulatory Treatment: Congress should consider factors like control over user assets, technological modifiability, centralization of structure, and technological/logistical capability to comply with regulations when determining DeFi's regulatory treatment, as "many DeFi protocols and non-controlling blockchains do not have the functional ability to register as MSBs or otherwise comply with MSB obligations." (p. 57)

Accounting Recommendations: The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) should address recognition and derecognition of digital asset tokens, issuer accounting, and potentially treat payment stablecoins as cash equivalents. (p. 58-59)

International Regulatory Standards and Landscape: The U.S. needs to "reassert global leadership on digital assets" by establishing a clear framework. The Report highlights international efforts by the FSB, FATF, and IOSCO, and existing comprehensive regimes like the EU's MiCA, noting that the U.S. framework should align with U.S. interests and values to attract firms and discourage operations in under-regulated jurisdictions. (p. 59-61)

IV. Banking and Digital Assets

The Report strongly criticizes the Biden Administration's "Operation Choke Point 2.0" for leading to the "widescale debanking of digital asset firms and their founders," citing FDIC Acting Chairman Travis Hill's comments on regulatory resistance. (p. 62) It praises the Trump Administration for ending this approach, citing rescissions of SEC Staff Accounting Bulletin (SAB) No. 121, FDIC prior-notification requirements, and OCC interpretive letters that "rea rmed that national banks and federal savings associations may engage in digital asset custody, stablecoin-related activities, and use blockchains to facilitate payments without seeking prior approval." (p. 63)

Bank Engagement with Digital Assets: Banks primarily engage by:

* Providing core banking services (deposits, loans) to digital asset firms. (p. 64)

* Facilitating customer access through custody, trade execution, and settlement. (p. 64)

* Exploring DLT for faster payments and tokenization of traditional products like deposits. (p. 64-66) The Report notes that "Tokenization has the potential to transform execution, settlement, and other banking activities that could benefit from these e ciencies." (p. 66)

* Digital asset custody and lending, though currently limited. (p. 67-68)

Current Regulatory Framework: The Report advocates for a "technology-neutral approach" to bank regulation, arguing that "Technological transformation does not necessarily alter the risk profile of an activity, and the same business presenting the same risk should be governed by the same rules." (p. 69) It criticizes the FRB's previous policy statement interpreting Section 9(13) of the Federal Reserve Act as creating a "de facto prohibition" on state member banks engaging in most digital asset activities. (p. 70-71)

Recommendations for Banking:

* Relaunch Innovation Efforts: Clarify and expand permissible digital asset activities for banks, ensure parity across charter types, and clarify supervisory expectations. This includes specific guidance on custody, third-party engagement, stablecoin reserves, principal activities, pilots, tokenization, and permissionless blockchains. (p. 72)

* Encourage State-Chartered Bank Innovation: The FRB should rescind the restrictive 2023 Section 9(13) Policy Guidance and related regulations. (p. 73)

* Develop Guidance and Best Practices: For banks and supervisors, that are technically sound and principles-based, potentially involving NIST for standards. (p. 73)

* Clarify Supervisor and Bank Roles: Ensure expectations for banking services are technology-neutral and do not discriminate against lawful businesses solely due to their industry, building on the withdrawal of previous restrictive guidance and the removal of "reputation risk" as a basis for supervisory criticism. (p. 74)

* Access to Banking Services: Provide clarity and transparency on the process for eligible institutions to obtain a bank charter or a Reserve Bank master account, including expected timelines and ensuring digital asset activities are not a sole prohibitive factor. (p. 75-76)

* Federal Credit Unions: Acknowledge their role in serving digital asset firms and members, clarifying legal permissibility for activities like custody and DLT use, and addressing capital treatment. (p. 76-77)

* Capital and Other Applicable Regulatory Treatment: Clarify when tokenized assets should have the same capital/liquidity treatment as underlying assets. The U.S. should adopt capital requirements that "accurately reflect the risk of the asset or activity" and advocate for the Basel Committee on Banking Supervision (BCBS) to revisit its cryptoasset standards, simplifying asset grouping and incorporating new data and technological innovations. (p. 77-80)

V. Stablecoins and Payments

The Report hails the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins Act (GENIUS), signed into law by President Trump on July 18, 2025, as a "watershed moment" for stablecoins and digital payments. (p. 88) GENIUS aims to provide regulatory clarity, bring stablecoin innovation onshore, bolster the U.S. economy, and "cement global dollar dominance." (p. 88)

Key features of GENIUS:

* Clear Licensing Regime: Ensures oversight and AML compliance. (p. 88)

* Stability and Transparency: Requires full reserves backed by high-quality liquid assets (e.g., U.S. Treasuries) and monthly reserve reports. (p. 88)

* Consumer Protection: Prioritizes stablecoin holders' claims in insolvency, prohibits rehypothecation of reserves, and requires segregation of reserve assets. (p. 88-89)

* Regulatory Classification: Clarifies that stablecoins are "neither a security nor a commodity," facilitating their use for consumer payments. (p. 89)

* Onshore Innovation & Cross-Border Flows: Requires U.S. licensing or comparable foreign standards, encourages reciprocity with other jurisdictions. (p. 93)

* National Security: Explicitly treats U.S.-licensed stablecoin issuers as "financial institutions" under the BSA and requires foreign issuers to comply with U.S. orders to freeze/seize assets for illicit use. (p. 94)

Innovation in Payments: The Report acknowledges the inefficiencies in legacy payment systems (slow retail payments, high cross-border costs) and sees DLT and stablecoins as promising solutions for faster, cheaper, and more transparent transactions. (p. 89-90) Dollar-denominated stablecoins dominate the market, accounting for over 99% of the $258 billion outstanding value as of July 2025. (p. 90) While primarily used for digital asset trading, stablecoins could see wider adoption in payments. (p. 91)

Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs): The Report strongly opposes CBDCs, viewing them as a threat to "individual rights, financial systems, and the sovereignty of the United States" due to their potential for "consolidat[ing] government control of personal financial information" and effectively turning fiscal policy over to "unelected monetary authorities." (p. 95) Executive Order 14178 prohibits U.S. agencies from establishing, issuing, or promoting CBDCs domestically or abroad. (p. 95) The Report supports legislation like the Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act. (p. 95)

Promoting U.S. Dollar Competitiveness: The dollar's dominance in global trade and finance is a key U.S. advantage. The Report warns that without strong U.S. leadership, alternative payment arrangements developed abroad could weaken the dollar's role and the effectiveness of U.S. national security tools. It calls for promoting U.S. private sector leadership in cross-border payments and financial technologies, establishing international standards reflecting U.S. interests, and encouraging payment solutions that protect the two-tier banking system, preserve individual rights, and incorporate strong AML/CFT/sanctions controls. (p. 96-98)

VI. Countering Illicit Finance

The Report acknowledges that digital assets, like traditional assets, can be abused by illicit actors, but stresses that the technology also offers mitigation tools. (p. 99) It emphasizes tailoring measures to encourage innovation and respect privacy. It highlights FinCEN's withdrawal of proposed rulemakings (e.g., "unhosted wallet rule") and the DOJ's commitment to ending "regulation by prosecution" as positive steps. (p. 99-100)

Illicit Finance Risks: While illicit digital asset activity volume is small compared to traditional finance (0.61% to 0.86% of on-chain volume in 2023), its impact can be significant (e.g., North Korea funding WMD programs, ransomware). (p. 101) Vulnerabilities include jurisdictional arbitrage (foreign service providers with weak AML/CFT), non-compliance by some providers, and anonymity-enhancing technologies (mixers, AECs, chain-hopping). (p. 102)

Improving AML/CFT and Sanctions Frameworks:

* Prescribing BSA Obligations: The Report recommends statutory changes to the BSA to define actors in the digital asset ecosystem with greater certainty, potentially creating bespoke financial institution types for digital assets. (p. 103-104) It supports tailoring AML/CFT obligations for payment stablecoin issuers. (p. 104)

* BSA Obligations and DeFi: While FinCEN's guidance is acknowledged, the Report points out challenges for "truly decentralized protocols" that may lack an administrator, control over funds, or the ability to collect customer information or file SARs. (p. 104-105) Congress should provide a clear definition of "true" decentralized protocols and clarify how obligations apply to entities that utilize smart contracts but retain some centralization. (p. 105)

* Further AML/CFT Regime Improvements: Treasury should evaluate next steps on the proposed rulemaking concerning CVC mixing, balancing illicit finance mitigation with privacy protection and burden reduction. (p. 106)

* Self-Custody: Congress should codify principles affirming the importance of U.S. individuals lawfully holding and transacting with their own digital assets without a financial intermediary, and that a software provider without "total independent control over value" is not a money transmitter. (p. 107)

* Enhancing Supervision: Supervisors need enhanced capabilities and expertise, including training and updated examination manuals. (p. 107-108)

* Adapting BSA Reporting: Modernize Suspicious Activity Report (SAR) reporting to capture digital asset-specific information. (p. 109) Congress should conform BSA reporting requirements with IRS tax reporting requirements (Form 8300). (p. 110)

* Improving Sanctions Compliance: Treasury should issue an RFI to solicit industry input on sanctions compliance and update OFAC's guidance for the virtual currency industry. (p. 111)

Advancing Privacy through Digital Identity and Related Tools: The Report supports civil liberties and privacy for individuals transacting on public blockchains while enabling regulated intermediaries to comply with AML/CFT and sanctions. It highlights digital identity technologies and Zero Knowledge Proofs as tools to balance these objectives. (p. 112-113)

Equipping Digital Asset Actors to Mitigate Risk:

* Enabling Private Sector Investigations: Congress should consider a digital asset-specific "hold law" providing a safe harbor for institutions to temporarily hold assets suspected of illicit activity for investigation. (p. 113-114)

* Increasing Public-Private Cooperation: Encourage greater information sharing through FinCEN's 314(a) and 314(b) programs and the Illicit Virtual Asset Notification (IVAN) partnership. (p. 114-115)

Disrupting and Mitigating Systemic Illicit Finance Risks:

* Applying Treasury Authorities: Congress should add a "sixth special measure" to Section 311 of the USA PATRIOT Act, allowing FinCEN to prohibit or condition "transmittals of funds" not tied to correspondent banking, enabling targeting of foreign digital asset exchanges. (p. 116-117)

* Leveraging OFAC Authorities: Treasury should continue to use OFAC's sanctions authorities to target malicious actors and limit access of foreign illicit digital asset actors to U.S. markets. (p. 117)

* Tailoring Law Enforcement Capabilities:Victim Compensation: Evaluate and amend victim compensation regulations to improve asset-forfeiture efforts for digital asset-related crimes. (p. 118)

* False Statements: Tailor 18 U.S.C. § 1014 to protect all financial institutions (Title 31 definition), including digital asset service providers, from false statements made to obtain or maintain access to services. (p. 118)

* Digital Asset Theft: Amend the National Stolen Property Act (NSPA) to clarify that digital assets are covered property. (p. 118)

* Anti-Tip-Off Amendments: Amend 18 U.S.C. § 1510 to cover all Title 31-defined financial institutions and expand the list of covered offenses. (p. 119)

* Civil Forfeiture Tracing: Amend 18 U.S.C. § 984 to apply the modified traceability requirement for cash to certain digital assets, allowing forfeiture of crime-linked digital assets in a commingled wallet without specific tracing. (p. 119)

Protecting the Digital Asset Industry from Malicious Cyber Actors: Strong cybersecurity practices are vital due to the national security threat posed by nation-state actors (e.g., DPRK) stealing digital assets. Recommendations include developing principles-based cybersecurity standards, increasing information sharing (e.g., through Treasury’s Automated Threat Information Feed, ATIF), and identifying gaps in operational resiliency. (p. 120-121)

VII. Taxation

The Report identifies challenges in applying federal income tax laws to digital assets due to their "tremendous variety of possible transaction types" with "no analog in traditional assets." (p. 123) It praises President Trump's signing of H.J. Res. 25, which "overturned a Biden Administration effort to define certain DeFi developers as 'brokers' for tax purposes." (p. 123)

Current Tax Guidance and Issues:

* Property, Not Currency: Notice 2014-21 states digital assets are treated as property for tax purposes. (p. 125)

* Corporate Alternative Minimum Tax (CAMT): Introduced by the Biden Administration, CAMT is criticized for its complexity and potential to "burden investment" and "contradicts the policy goals of Executive Order No. 14219." (p. 125-126) The Report recommends guidance to clarify that "adjusted financial statement income" (AFSI) does not include unrealized gains/losses on cryptocurrency. (p. 126)

* Staking – Grantor Trust Classification: Guidance is needed on whether staking digital assets by a trust affects its qualification as an investment trust treated as a grantor trust. (p. 127)

* Wrapping: Guidance is requested on whether wrapping and unwrapping digital assets are taxable transactions. (p. 127)

* IRS FAQs: The IRS should update its FAQs on digital assets to reflect published guidance and regulations. (p. 128)

* Other Issues: Further guidance is sought on mining and staking income timing and character, valuation of digital assets, NFTs (as collectibles), losses on digital assets, charitable deductions, and complex issues like tokenization creating new assets, investment company rules, and blockchain splits/mergers. (p. 128-129)

Priority Legislative Recommendations:

* Characterization as Securities or Commodities: Legislation should treat digital assets as a "new class of assets subject to modified versions of tax rules applicable to securities or commodities for federal income tax purposes." This includes expanding Sections 475 (mark-to-market), 864(b) (trading safe harbors), 1058 (securities loans), 7704 (publicly traded partnership rules), 1091 (wash sales), and 1259 (constructive sales) to actively traded fungible digital assets. (p. 129-130)

* Stablecoins: Legislation should characterize payment stablecoins for federal income tax purposes, with debt being the most appropriate. It should address the applicability of wash sale and anti-bearer bond rules to avoid impeding widespread use as cash-equivalents. (p. 130-131)

* Wash Sales: Amend wash sale rules to include digital assets, but exclude payment stablecoins. (p. 131)

* Crypto Lending: Amend Section 1058 to apply to loans of actively traded fungible digital assets with similar terms to securities loans. (p. 131-132)

Taxpayer Reporting:

* De Minimis Digital Asset Receipts: Treasury and IRS should issue guidance addressing de minimis receipts (airdrops, small staking/mining rewards) to reduce administrative burden on taxpayers. (p. 133)

* Timing of Income from Mining and Staking: Review and potentially modify/reverse existing guidance on income timing for mining and staking rewards, considering deferring inclusion until sale/disposition. (p. 133-134)

* Section 6038D (Foreign Digital Asset Reporting): Legislation could require taxpayers to report foreign digital asset accounts to address tax evasion risks from offshore exchanges. (p. 134-135)

* Section 6038D and FBAR Reporting: Streamline duplicative reporting by allowing a single form for both IRS and FinCEN. (p. 135)

Third-Party Information Reporting:

* Electronic Furnishing of Form 1099-DA: Propose regulations for a less burdensome method for digital asset brokers to obtain consent for electronic delivery of payee statements. (p. 136)

* Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework (CARF) Implementation: Propose regulations to implement CARF, an international tax transparency standard, to obtain information on U.S. taxpayers' digital asset transactions in foreign jurisdictions, while minimizing burdens on U.S. brokers. (p. 136-137)

* Basis Reporting on Transferred Digital Assets: Propose regulations requiring basis information to be reported when digital assets are transferred between centralized digital asset exchanges. (p. 137-138)

* Digital Assets Received in a Trade or Business: Propose regulations for reporting digital assets paid to a trade or business that address stakeholder concerns (privacy, scope, disincentives). (p. 138-139)

VIII. Miscellaneous Recommendations

* Cybersecurity: Develop principles-based requirements and standards for digital asset firms, increase information sharing on threats (e.g., through ATIF), and address operational resiliency gaps. (p. 140)

* Repatriation and Domestication of Offshore Foundations: Incentivize non-profit organizations supporting blockchain development to domicile in the United States. (p. 140)

* Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and U.S. Digital Asset Stockpile: Executive Order No. 14233 establishes a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and a U.S. Digital Asset Stockpile, to be administered by Treasury and capitalized by forfeited digital assets. The bitcoin in the Reserve will generally not be sold and will be maintained as reserve assets. Treasury and Commerce will develop strategies to acquire additional bitcoin in a budget-neutral way. (p. 141)

SOURCE:

https://www.whitehouse.gov/crypto/

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2025/07/Digital-Assets-Report-EO14178.pdf