United On Crypto: UK And US Announce Joint Regulatory Effort

bitcoinistPublicado a 2025-09-23Actualizado a 2025-09-23

Resumen

London and Washington have launched a joint group to align rules for crypto and digital assets, officials said. Based on...

Trusted Editorial content, reviewed by leading industry experts and seasoned editors. Ad Disclosure

London and Washington have launched a joint group to align rules for crypto and digital assets, officials said. Based on reports, the effort — named the Transatlantic Task Force for Markets of the Future — will include finance ministry staff and financial regulators from both countries and aims to produce recommendations within 180 days.

Task Force Scope And Timeline

According to Reuters and the Financial Times, the group will look at a range of issues, from how stablecoins are treated to opening capital markets across the two countries.

The plan calls for the task force to report back within 180 days with suggested steps that could smooth cross-border listings and fundraising for companies working with digital tokens.

Why The Push Now

Reports have disclosed that the UK wants to make London a more attractive place for financial listings and investment after Brexit. Some UK companies have chosen to list in the US, and regulators on both sides say that clearer, more aligned rules could help.

The US has also moved to update its approach to stablecoins and other tokens, and officials see value in talking through practical fixes together.

Areas Of Focus For Regulators

According to published accounts, the task force will consider at least four main areas: regulation of digital assets generally; stablecoin rules; anti-money laundering and consumer protections; and how wholesale markets might use tokenised securities.

Officials may also explore controlled pilot programs or “sandboxes” to test technical solutions for trading and settlement.

As of today, the market cap of cryptocurrencies stood at $3.86 trillion. Chart: TradingView

Unanswered Questions Remain

Even with the new push, key details are not settled. Reports note that it is unclear exactly which rules would be harmonized and how far either side will move from existing approaches.

Any recommendations from the task group will still need action by Parliament or Congress and likely further consultation with industry. That means real change could take longer than the 180-day review period to reach the rulebooks.

What This Means For Firms And Investors

If the task force succeeds, companies that operate in both countries could face fewer conflicting rules and lower compliance costs. Based on reports, some market participants see potential for easier cross-border capital raising.

Others warn that gaps in enforcement or differences in legal systems could limit what the group can achieve quickly.

Next Steps And Potential Outcomes

Reports say the first public product will be a set of recommendations from the task group within 180 days. After that, regulators may propose rule changes and lawmakers could begin formal work.

The end result might be a closer alignment on standards for stablecoins, AML checks, and custody rules — or simply clearer guidance that helps firms plan.

Featured image from ICO Bench, chart from TradingView

Editorial Process for bitcoinist is centered on delivering thoroughly researched, accurate, and unbiased content. We uphold strict sourcing standards, and each page undergoes diligent review by our team of top technology experts and seasoned editors. This process ensures the integrity, relevance, and value of our content for our readers.

Christian, a journalist and editor with leadership roles in Philippine and Canadian media, is fueled by his love for writing and cryptocurrency. Off-screen, he's a cook and cinephile who's constantly intrigued by the size of the universe.

Lecturas Relacionadas

The Full Story of How Crypto Unicorn Blockstream Is Mired in Serious Fraud Allegations

This article details serious allegations of fraud against Bitcoin infrastructure company Blockstream, founded by Bitcoin pioneer Adam Back. In June 2024, investigative account NatInfoSec published a report accusing Blockstream's mining note (BMN) program of potentially operating a multi-billion dollar scheme with Ponzi-like characteristics. The core allegations focus on Blockstream Mining Notes (BMNs), which offer investors fixed annual yields up to approximately 20% from Bitcoin mining. NatInfoSec's investigation raises several key issues: 1. **Suspicious Hashrate & Payout Capacity**: The analysis suggests Blockstream would need 20-45 EH/s of mining power to cover its BMN obligations, but its public dashboard shows only around 15 EH/s. Furthermore, no verifiable public evidence (e.g., grid connection records, import data) was found to support the massive mining operation required. 2. **Questionable Payout Source**: The BMN contract allows Blockstream to use Bitcoin from *any source* (Substitute Performance BTC) to fulfill investor payouts, raising concerns that payouts may not come from actual mining revenue. 3. **High-Risk, Fixed Returns**: Offering ~20% fixed yields in the volatile, cyclical Bitcoin mining industry is viewed as highly unusual and requires clear explanation. 4. **Undisclosed Criminal Record of Key Figure**: Christopher William Cook, a key figure in Blockstream's mining operations and CEO of spin-off Exacore, was found to have a federal felony conviction for mail fraud in 2008, a fact not disclosed in BMN offering documents. His background was also allegedly embellished. 5. **Potential Contagion to BSTR SPAC**: Questions were raised about whether these liabilities and Cook's record should have been disclosed in the SEC filings for Bitcoin Standard Treasury Company (BSTR), a separate Adam Back-associated firm planning a SPAC merger. The crypto community is divided. BitMEX Research validated Cook's criminal record and expressed concern over the high yields but found other evidence lacking or misleading, noting the legal separation between BMN, Blockstream, and BSTR. Blockstream defenders, like Samson Mow, argue the mining is real. Critics, however, emphasize the lack of independent, verifiable proof of the mining operation's scale and the true source of investor payouts. The article concludes that BMN remains shrouded in key unanswered questions regarding its actual size, the verifiability of its underlying mining assets and payouts, the source of its high yields, and the full role and disclosure concerning Chris Cook. Blockstream had not issued a comprehensive response at the time of writing.

marsbitHace 11 min(s)

The Full Story of How Crypto Unicorn Blockstream Is Mired in Serious Fraud Allegations

marsbitHace 11 min(s)

The Full Story Behind Encryption Unicorn Blockstream's Deep Entanglement in Serious Fraud Allegations

This article details allegations of serious fraud surrounding the crypto company Blockstream, founded by Bitcoin pioneer Adam Back. Investigation account NatInfoSec accuses Blockstream of raising billions through its Blockstream Mining Note (BMN) products, which offer high fixed yields of up to 20% from purported mining revenue. The core allegations are: 1) Blockstream's public mining hash rate (15 EH/s) appears insufficient to cover the massive payout obligations from sold BMN notes, raising questions about the true source of investor payouts. 2) Key executive Christopher William Cook, central to the mining operations, has a prior federal conviction for mail fraud, a fact not disclosed to investors. Cook's background and lavish lifestyle are highlighted as red flags. 3) The structure allows payouts from any source of BTC, not necessarily mining revenue, which critics argue gives it Ponzi-like characteristics. The controversy also touches on Bitcoin Standard Treasury Company (BSTR), a related entity planning a SPAC上市. Critics question whether BMN's liabilities and Cook's record should be disclosed in BSTR's filings. BitMEX Research offered a tempered analysis, confirming Cook's criminal record is likely true and the high yields concerning, but found other claims like insufficient抵押证据 less substantiated. Community debate centers on the need for verifiable proof of Blockstream's mining output and revenue. The article concludes that while fraud is not proven, BMN presents significant, unresolved questions regarding its actual scale, the source of its high fixed returns, the verifiability of its mining operations and payouts, and the full disclosure of associated risks and personnel backgrounds. Blockstream has not yet issued a formal response.

链捕手Hace 1 hora(s)

The Full Story Behind Encryption Unicorn Blockstream's Deep Entanglement in Serious Fraud Allegations

链捕手Hace 1 hora(s)

Trading

Spot
Futuros
活动图片