Federal Reserve quietly reverses anti-crypto stance with new policy

ambcryptoPublicado a 2025-12-17Actualizado a 2025-12-17

Resumen

The Federal Reserve has reversed its restrictive 2023 policy on "novel activities" and replaced it with a new framework that creates a clear pathway for banks to engage in digital-asset and blockchain innovation. Announced on 17 December, the move adopts a "same activity, same risks, same regulation" philosophy, allowing banks to pursue crypto-related services like custody, tokenization, and stablecoin integration if they demonstrate strong risk management. The policy shift enables both insured and uninsured state member banks to apply for innovative activities, benefiting crypto-focused institutions. This marks a significant regulatory pivot from discouraging crypto engagement to encouraging responsible innovation under supervision, aligning with broader U.S. efforts to integrate blockchain into mainstream finance.

The Federal Reserve has withdrawn its restrictive 2023 policy on “novel activities” and replaced it with a new framework.

The new policy creates a clear pathway for banks to engage in digital-asset and blockchain innovation, marking one of the most significant regulatory pivots in years.

The move, announced on 17 December, reverses the Fed’s prior stance, which had limited state member banks to only those activities explicitly allowed for national banks.

The 2023 policy had served as a de facto barrier to crypto-related services, especially custody, tokenization, and stablecoin integrations. Its withdrawal signals a shift toward enabling responsible digital-asset activity within the U.S. banking system.

Fed removes 2023 restrictions and adopts innovation-friendly standard

Under the new policy statement, the Federal Reserve adopts a “same activity, same risks, same regulation” philosophy — a framework that allows banks to pursue new technologies as long as they demonstrate strong risk management and comply with supervisory expectations.

Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman described the new guidance as an effort to modernize the banking sector while maintaining safety and soundness.

“New technologies offer efficiencies to banks and improved products and services to bank customers,” Bowman said.

“By creating a pathway for responsible, innovative products and services, the Board is helping ensure that the banking sector remains safe and sound while also modern, efficient, and effective.”

The withdrawal of the 2023 guidance also removes the supplementary crypto-specific interpretations that strongly discouraged engagement with digital assets.

That change alone opens the door for supervised banks to revisit cryptocurrency custody, tokenization, blockchain settlement tools, and stablecoin integrations.

Clearer path for both insured and uninsured banks — including crypto-focused institutions

One of the most notable changes is that both insured and uninsured state member banks can now apply to conduct innovative activities, including those not yet permissible for national banks.

This has major implications for Wyoming SPDI-style institutions and trust banks focusing on digital assets.

The Fed states that uninsured banks may engage in a broader range of activities if they demonstrate adequate liquidity, loss-absorbing capacity, and credible resolution mechanisms.

The move follows the recent pilot program by the CFTC, and the OCC’s approval of trust charters for some crypto companies.

What this means for crypto adoption

This policy update does not give banks carte blanche to launch crypto products — but it finally replaces a restrictive framework with a risk-based approval system that encourages experimentation.

Banks seeking to custody crypto, settle tokenized assets, integrate stablecoins, or deploy blockchain rails now have:

  • A formal application path
  • Clarity on supervisory expectations
  • A regulatory environment that no longer assumes such activities are inherently unsafe

It’s a structural shift in tone — from “don’t engage with crypto” to “engage responsibly under supervision.”


Final Thoughts

  • The Federal Reserve’s withdrawal of its 2023 policy marks its clearest pro-innovation stance in years, opening the door for bank-led crypto adoption.
  • With the CFTC and OCC already advancing digital-asset frameworks, U.S. banking regulators are converging on a strategy that integrates blockchain into mainstream finance.

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat did the Federal Reserve do with its 2023 policy on 'novel activities'?

AThe Federal Reserve withdrew its restrictive 2023 policy and replaced it with a new framework that creates a clear pathway for banks to engage in digital-asset and blockchain innovation.

QWhat is the core regulatory philosophy adopted in the new Federal Reserve policy?

AThe new policy adopts a 'same activity, same risks, same regulation' philosophy, allowing banks to pursue new technologies if they demonstrate strong risk management and comply with supervisory expectations.

QAccording to the article, what specific crypto-related services are now more accessible to banks under the new policy?

AThe new framework opens the door for supervised banks to revisit cryptocurrency custody, tokenization, blockchain settlement tools, and stablecoin integrations.

QHow does the new policy affect both insured and uninsured state member banks?

ABoth insured and uninsured state member banks can now apply to conduct innovative activities, including those not yet permissible for national banks, provided they demonstrate adequate risk management.

QWhat broader regulatory trend does this Federal Reserve move represent alongside actions from the CFTC and OCC?

AThis move indicates that U.S. banking regulators are converging on a strategy to integrate blockchain into mainstream finance, following the CFTC's pilot program and the OCC's approval of trust charters for crypto companies.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Grupos católicos y de seguridad advierten que la Ley CLARITY podría debilitar las salvaguardias contra el delito con criptomonedas

Una coalición de líderes católicos, grupos vinculados a la aplicación de la ley y defensores contra la trata de personas advierte que la Ley CLARITY podría debilitar las salvaguardias utilizadas para combatir los delitos habilitados por las criptomonedas. Las críticas se centran en disposiciones que protegerían a los desarrolladores de software no custodio de ser tratados como transmisores de dinero. Este debate aborda una de las cuestiones más difíciles en la regulación de las criptomonedas: cómo distinguir el software neutral de la intermediación financiera. Los defensores de las criptomonedas argumentan que los desarrolladores que publican código no custodio no deben ser regulados como exchanges o procesadores de pagos. Los críticos temen que exenciones amplias puedan dificultar el rastreo de las finanzas ilícitas. El software no custodio es central para las finanzas descentralizadas (DeFi). La Ley CLARITY busca crear reglas más claras de estructura de mercado, pero la oposición muestra que no todas las batallas políticas tratan sobre la protección del inversor. Algunos legisladores también considerarán el impacto en la trata de personas, la evasión de sanciones y la visibilidad para la aplicación de la ley. La resistencia no significa que el proyecto de ley esté muerto, pero podría llevar a enmiendas, salvaguardias más estrictas o requisitos de información adicionales. Para las empresas de criptomonedas, las consecuencias son altas: reglas más claras podrían desbloquear inversiones, pero si el proyecto se enmarca como un debilitamiento de las salvaguardias contra el crimen, su camino político será más difícil.

bitcoinistHace 1 hora(s)

Grupos católicos y de seguridad advierten que la Ley CLARITY podría debilitar las salvaguardias contra el delito con criptomonedas

bitcoinistHace 1 hora(s)

La crónica del fraude grave que envuelve al unicornio cripto Blockstream

A lo largo de 2024, Blockstream, la empresa de cripto del pionero de Bitcoin Adam Back, se ha visto envuelta en varias controversias. Una investigación de NatInfoSec lanzó graves acusaciones sobre su producto de notas mineras, Blockstream Mining Note (BMN). Los principales señalamientos incluyen: una discrepancia entre el poder de cómputo mostrado (15 EH/s) y el necesario para cumplir con las obligaciones de los BMN (20-45 EH/s); una falta de evidencia verificable pública sobre las operaciones mineras a esa escala; rendimientos anuales fijos inusualmente altos, cercanos al 20%; y el descubrimiento de que Christopher William Cook, figura clave de la operación minera de Blockstream a través de Exacore, tiene antecedentes penales por fraude postal, información no revelada a los inversores. Aunque BitMEX Research y otros como Samson Mow han cuestionado algunos puntos por falta de pruebas o por implicar incorrectamente a BSTR, la compañía de tesorería de Bitcoin asociada a Back, las preguntas centrales sobre los BMN persisten. La comunidad y los analistas exigen mayor transparencia y capacidad de verificación sobre: el tamaño real y los límites de responsabilidad de los BMN; la fuente de los altos rendimientos prometidos; la procedencia verificable de los BTC pagados a los inversores; y el papel exacto de Cook. Hasta ahora, Blockstream no ha emitido una respuesta oficial integral a estas acusaciones.

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

La crónica del fraude grave que envuelve al unicornio cripto Blockstream

marsbitHace 4 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片