IRS proposes electronic crypto tax forms, but what about the staking tax issue?

ambcryptoPublished on 2026-03-06Last updated on 2026-03-06

Abstract

The U.S. Treasury and IRS have proposed requiring crypto brokers to use electronic delivery for tax forms by default, eliminating the costly and burdensome practice of mailing paper copies. This aims to streamline tax reporting for exchanges with large user bases. However, a major unresolved issue remains the double taxation of crypto staking rewards. Currently, the IRS treats staking rewards as taxable income upon receipt and also applies capital gains tax when the assets are later sold at a profit. Lawmaker Mike Carey is urging the IRS to review and resolve this issue to prevent driving investors to more lenient offshore jurisdictions. The IRS has indicated it will brief lawmakers on its ongoing review of staking tax treatment.

The U.S. Treasury and the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), the tax watchdog, have proposed that crypto brokers use default electronic delivery for crypto tax forms for customers.

In a bid to overhaul its crypto tax reporting regime, the IRS seems ready to reduce the compliance burden for brokers (exchanges and other crypto platforms).

Currently, the IRS requires brokers to submit two crypto tax forms, one to the regulator and another to the customer.

For customers who haven’t signed up for email, their paper tax forms are physically mailed. If an exchange handles over a million users, they have to send +1 million paper crypto tax forms via physical mail per year for the same – An overwhelming cost and compliance burden.

Under the latest proposal, the IRS seeks to stop offering paper copies entirely and have crypto tax forms delivered by email by default. Stakeholders have 60 days to provide feedback on the proposal before the IRS issues formal guidance.

Will crypto staking tax be resolved?

While the push for a crypto tax reporting regime may be positively welcomed by brokers, there are other unresolved issues too. For example, U.S investors still face double taxation for crypto staking rewards.

Currently, the IRS treats crypto staking rewards as income tax guidelines. As such, if an investor receives 1 Ethereum [ETH] as a staking reward, the value (currently at $2000) will trigger an income tax immediately when you receive it.

At the same time, if you hold it and offload it later, say, when ETH surges to $4k, capital gains tax will also apply.

U.S lawmaker Mike Carey has been pushing the U.S Treasury and the IRS to clarify and offer relief on crypto staking taxes. In a recent House committee hearing, Carey sought a similar direction from IRS officials.

“America needs to be the crypto capital of the world. Our tax code needs to reflect that priority, especially for crypto stakers and miners.”

In response, Frank Bisignano, the IRS’s CEO, said he will soon brief the legislator on the ongoing reviews and the way forward for treating crypto staking rewards for tax purposes.

It remains to be seen whether the said IRS review will offer miners and stakers tax relief. However, critics have argued that double taxation will likely push more investors to offshore jurisdictions with more lenient crypto staking tax regimes.


Final Summary

  • The IRS has proposed an overhaul of the crypto tax reporting regime that seeks to scrap out mailing of paper-based crypto tax forms and opt for e-mail by default.
  • Congressman Mike Carey is pushing the IRS to table crypto tax reviews to resolve the current double taxation of mining and staking rewards.

Related Questions

QWhat is the main proposal from the IRS regarding crypto tax forms?

AThe IRS has suggested that crypto brokers should use default electronic delivery (email) for crypto tax forms to customers, eliminating the requirement for physical paper copies.

QWhy is the current system of mailing paper tax forms a burden for large crypto exchanges?

AExchanges with over a million users are required to mail more than a million paper forms annually, which creates a significant compliance and cost burden.

QWhat is the 'double taxation' issue U.S. crypto investors face with staking rewards?

AStaking rewards are taxed as income at the time they are received, and then if the asset is sold later at a higher price, a capital gains tax is also applied to the profit.

QWho is the U.S. lawmaker pushing for clarity and relief on crypto staking taxes?

ACongressman Mike Carey has been urging the U.S. Treasury and the IRS to clarify and offer tax relief for crypto staking rewards to avoid double taxation.

QWhat was the response from the IRS's CEO regarding the review of crypto staking taxes?

AIRS CEO Frank Bisignano stated that he would soon brief Congressman on the ongoing reviews and the planned approach for treating crypto staking rewards for tax purposes.

Related Reads

MoneyGram: Why Did We Launch Our Own Stablecoin?

MoneyGram, a global leader in cross-border remittances for over 80 years, has launched its own stablecoin, MGUSD. The initiative aims to evolve from single-transaction services to becoming a more integral part of users' financial lives. By allowing customers to hold a stable US dollar balance within the MoneyGram app, MGUSD enables not only remittances but also everyday spending, currency exchange, cash access, and future financial services. Targeting the billions globally who face challenges like currency volatility or lack of bank accounts, MGUSD leverages Stellar blockchain technology with a self-custody wallet architecture. This gives users control over their assets while providing a secure, compliant experience through a trusted brand. The approach focuses on solving existing customer pain points within MoneyGram's established network, rather than competing for broad crypto market liquidity. A key advantage is MoneyGram's hybrid model, combining digital services with the world's largest physical network for crypto-to-cash conversions. The stablecoin also modernizes the company's internal infrastructure, streamlining treasury management and partner settlements, with annual forex volume via stablecoins already reaching $2 billion. The project was delivered in about a year, driven by a reorganization into agile, cross-functional teams that operate with startup-like speed while leveraging decades of institutional expertise. Partners include Stablecoin (issuance), Crossmint (wallet APIs), Fireblocks (enterprise treasury), m0 (smart contracts), and the Stellar network. MoneyGram emphasizes that enhancing direct consumer offerings strengthens its partner ecosystem. The future direction is clear: to provide users worldwide with stable value storage, better financial tools, and greater control over their funds through a trusted, existing network.

Foresight News3m ago

MoneyGram: Why Did We Launch Our Own Stablecoin?

Foresight News3m ago

BIP-110 Controversy Intensifies: Bitcoin May Face Its Most Divisive Hard Fork Battle in Years

Bitcoin is approaching a critical block height of 961,632, which could activate the controversial BIP-110 proposal. This proposal aims to restrict the amount of non-financial data, such as inscriptions and other large data payloads, within Bitcoin transactions. Supporters, including some node operators and Bitcoin purists, argue that BIP-110 is necessary to preserve Bitcoin's core function as a monetary settlement layer by reducing network congestion and node operational burdens caused by non-essential data. They frame it as a correction to keep the network true to its original purpose. However, critics, including prominent figures like Blockstream's Adam Back and developer Jameson Lopp, warn that the proposal's implementation mechanism is dangerously flawed. They highlight that its low 55% miner signaling threshold, coupled with a contentious enforcement mechanism allowing nodes to unilaterally reject non-compliant blocks, significantly increases the risk of a chain split. Opponents argue this sets a dangerous precedent for transaction censorship, undermines Bitcoin's protocol neutrality, and creates excessive uncertainty for developers and businesses, especially since the rule is proposed as a temporary one-year measure. Market analysts, such as those from Bitfinex, suggest a full-scale network split is unlikely due to a lack of broad economic consensus. Major mining pools remain neutral, and adoption of the new rules is minimal. They view the situation more as a governance stress test. The primary risk is operational disruption: if a minority chain persists, major exchanges and custodians may need to temporarily suspend Bitcoin deposits and withdrawals to manage security and liquidity, potentially unsettling newer institutional investors. While BIP-110 is not expected to succeed in overtaking the main chain, its approach has ignited a significant debate about Bitcoin's governance, core values, and resilience.

Foresight News40m ago

BIP-110 Controversy Intensifies: Bitcoin May Face Its Most Divisive Hard Fork Battle in Years

Foresight News40m ago

Crypto Market Makers Are Collectively Seeking Change as Money Becomes Harder to Earn

**Summary: Crypto Market Makers Adapt as Margins Shrink** Leading crypto market maker GSR exemplifies a broader industry shift, moving beyond traditional market-making to become a full-service "Web3 investment bank." Its recent strategic acquisitions—including an SEC-registered broker-dealer, rebranded as GSR Securities—and purchases of token advisory firms aim to create an integrated platform covering token design, fundraising, listing, liquidity provision, and asset management. This includes launching an ETF and investing in tokenization platforms like Libeara, backed by a strategic investment from Standard Chartered's SC Ventures. This transformation is not unique to GSR. Other major players like Keyrock, B2C2, Wintermute, and DWF Labs are also expanding geographically, pursuing regulatory licenses (especially under frameworks like MiCA in the EU), and diversifying into over-the-counter (OTC) trading, asset management, and real-world asset tokenization. The driving force behind this collective pivot is a rapidly changing market. Profits from traditional altcoin market-making are declining due to fewer viable projects, reduced client budgets, increased competition, and smarter, more demanding clients. Simultaneously, regulatory pressures are mounting, making compliance a baseline cost. Extreme market events further expose teams lacking robust risk controls. Consequently, the crypto market-making business model is evolving from one reliant on information asymmetry and volatility to a more institutionalized, regulated, and service-diverse industry. Survival now depends on building systemic capabilities beyond mere liquidity provision.

marsbit2h ago

Crypto Market Makers Are Collectively Seeking Change as Money Becomes Harder to Earn

marsbit2h ago

Trading

Spot
Futures
活动图片