The Washington Power of the Crypto Sphere

marsbitPublicado a 2026-03-04Actualizado a 2026-03-04

Resumen

The crypto policy landscape in Washington has evolved significantly, now comprising a network of think tanks, trade associations, and ecosystem-specific advocacy groups. Key organizations include: - **Coin Center (2014)**: The first crypto policy think tank, focused on user rights, self-custody, privacy, and tax reforms like taxing staking rewards only upon sale. - **Blockchain Association (2018)**: The largest industry group with 100+ members, advocating for tax equality, market structure legislation, and DeFi protection. - **DeFi Education Fund (2021)**: Focused on DeFi, protecting developers, empowering users, and promoting permissionless blockchains. - **Solana Policy Institute (2025)**: The first ecosystem-specific group, pushing for tokenized securities and expanded accredited investor definitions. - **Hyperliquid Policy Center (2026)**: Dedicated to regulatory clarity for decentralized perpetual futures trading. Shared priorities include developer protection (via the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act), staking tax reform, self-custody rights, and small transaction tax exemptions. While all align on core issues, each specializes in distinct areas—from ideological advocacy (Coin Center) to ecosystem-specific agendas (Solana, Hyperliquid). This reflects a mature, multi-faceted approach to crypto policy engagement.

Written by: David Christopher

Compiled by: Saoirse, Foresight News

The policy infrastructure of the crypto industry has matured considerably over the past decade.

From a single think tank in Washington D.C. initially, it has developed into a complete network comprising industry associations, advocacy organizations, and ecosystem-specific lobbying entities.

The current landscape includes both comprehensive industry groups and specialized advocates focused on single ecosystems, each playing different roles in the process of promoting regulatory clarity.

In February 2026, the Hyperliquid Policy Center was officially established, becoming the newest member; prior to this, the Solana Policy Institute had already debuted in 2025.

Let's take a closer look: which organizations are the voices within Washington's crypto policy power centers.

Coin Center (2014)

The earliest crypto policy think tank.

Coin Center has been deeply involved in Washington for over a decade, consistently advocating for open blockchain networks and user rights, and is also the most ideologically libertarian-leaning institution in the industry.

Unlike other organizations that focus on industry interests, Coin Center insists on prioritizing individual users: defending users' rights to self-custody, privacy protection, and the right to use crypto assets without being burdened by cumbersome tax obligations.

Its core goals for 2026 include:

  • Promoting the 'Keep Your Coins Act' to prohibit the federal government from banning self-custody;
  • Supporting the 'Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act' (BRCA), clarifying that developers who do not custody user funds should not be considered money transmitters;
  • Proposing detailed tax reforms: establishing a $600 de minimis exemption threshold for small transactions, simplifying cost basis reporting, and taxing staking rewards only upon sale, not upon receipt.

The taxation of staking rewards is a common pain point across the industry.

Currently, the U.S. IRS treats newly generated tokens from staking as current income, requiring validators to pay taxes even before selling any assets, resulting in extremely high compliance costs.

Coin Center advocates for treating staking rewards like other generated assets: taxed only upon sale.

Blockchain Association (BA, 2018)

The largest crypto industry association in the U.S., representing over 100 member institutions, including exchanges, mining companies, DeFi protocols, and infrastructure service providers.

If Coin Center speaks based on ideology, the Blockchain Association operates in a coalition model: coordinating member interests and translating them into legislative priorities.

Current key focuses include:

  • Tax equality, market structure legislation, DeFi protection;
  • Formally releasing tax principles, calling for de minimis exemptions, treating stablecoins as cash equivalents, and domesticating perpetual contracts;
  • Full support for BRCA and broader developer protection clauses.

DeFi Education Fund (DEF, 2021)

Initially established with a grant from Uniswap governance, specifically focused on decentralized finance.

Work revolves around three pillars: protecting software developers, empowering DeFi users, and defending permissionless blockchains.

At the developer level:

DEF argues that builders should be exempt from liability when third parties misuse tools, opposing the forced fitting of developers into regulatory frameworks designed for custodial intermediaries. Consistent with Coin Center and the Blockchain Association, DEF also strongly supports BRCA (the 'Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act').

At the user level:

Promoting the right to self-custody, privacy protection, reducing reliance on trusted third parties, and emphasizing financial inclusion—permissionless networks allow users to bypass gatekeepers and freely access financial services.

DEF's working style is more legal and research-oriented: submitting amicus curiae briefs, regulatory comments, publishing educational interpretations, operating the high-impact 'DeFi Debrief' newsletter, and continuously pushing for BRCA to be included in overall market structure legislation.

Solana Policy Institute (2025)

The first policy institution dedicated to a public blockchain ecosystem within the industry, co-founded by the former CEO of the DeFi Education Fund and the former CEO of the Blockchain Association.

It shares core demands (developer protection, staking tax reform) with the entire industry while closely serving the strategic interests of the Solana ecosystem.

Core distinctive agendas:

  • Project Open: Promoting a security tokenization pilot, allowing issuers to register equity as digital tokens on public chains, achieving instant settlement and transparent ownership records, positioning Solana as infrastructure for scaling traditional capital markets;
  • Supporting the 'Equal Opportunity for All Investors Act': Expanding the definition of accredited investors, moving beyond wealth thresholds to include knowledge qualifications. The institute points out that current rules exclude 87% of Americans from the private market.

Hyperliquid Policy Center (2026)

The newest and most narrowly focused crypto policy institution, established with a $29 million endowment from the Hyper Foundation, with the sole core mission: making perpetual futures compliant and available domestically in the U.S.

Led by the former Chief Policy Officer of the Blockchain Association, HPC precisely targets the regulatory gap for decentralized derivatives—this is Hyperliquid's core business and one of the fastest-growing sectors in the crypto industry.

Institutional goals:

Educating policymakers on the operational logic of non-custodial trading protocols and promoting a regulatory framework that does not require intermediary custody.

The timing is highly strategic:

With the 'Clarity Act' stalled in the Senate, HPC seizes the window to specifically shape regulators' understanding of DeFi derivatives.

Its core argument:

The perpetual contracts market will flow overseas and to decentralized protocols regardless; the U.S. must either establish a framework to compete or completely cede the market.

Data shows that perpetual contract trading volume reached $92.7 trillion in 2025.

Industry-wide Consensus and Differences

Although the five institutions have different positioning and scopes, they are highly aligned on core demands:

Common goals:

  • Developer protection: Almost all support BRCA, clarifying that developers who do not custody funds are not money transmitters;
  • Staking tax reform: Block rewards / staking rewards taxed upon sale, not upon receipt;
  • User self-custody rights;
  • De minimis exemption for small transactions.

Divergent directions:

  • Coin Center: Adheres to principles, focuses on privacy and user rights;
  • Blockchain Association: Coordinates the interests of over 100 industry members;
  • DeFi Education Fund: Focuses deeply on DeFi-specific regulation and legal support;
  • Solana / Hyperliquid policy institutions: Ecosystem-specific, with agendas closely tied to their core businesses (security tokenization, perpetual contracts).

These institutions collectively define the industry's core values, while simultaneously preserving specialized advancement space for key niche issues, marking the U.S. crypto industry's transition from 'unified voice' to an era of 'specialized, ecosystem-driven, and refined' policy博弈 (game theory / competition).

Preguntas relacionadas

QWhat is the core mission of the Hyperliquid Policy Center (HPC) established in 2026?

AThe Hyperliquid Policy Center's sole core mission is to make perpetual futures legally compliant in the United States.

QWhich organization is described as the earliest crypto policy think tank and the most ideologically libertarian in the industry?

ACoin Center, established in 2014, is described as the earliest crypto policy think tank and the most ideologically libertarian.

QWhat is a major pain point in crypto taxation that Coin Center aims to reform regarding staking rewards?

ACoin Center aims to reform the taxation of staking rewards so that they are taxed only upon sale, not at the time they are received.

QWhat is the primary focus of the Solana Policy Institute's 'Project Open' agenda?

AThe primary focus of 'Project Open' is to promote a security tokenization pilot, allowing issuers to register equity as digital tokens on a public blockchain for instant settlement and transparent ownership records.

QWhat is a key common goal shared by all five policy organizations mentioned in the article?

AA key common goal shared by all organizations is developer protection, specifically supporting the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act (BRCA) to clarify that developers who do not custody user funds are not money transmitters.

Lecturas Relacionadas

Agent Race Ends, Super Workbench Takes Over

The era of fragmented AI agents is ending. Over the past month, China's tech giants—Tencent, Alibaba, and ByteDance—have simultaneously shifted strategy: instead of launching new, standalone AI agents, they are consolidating their various agent projects into unified "super workbenches." Tencent integrated its QClaw teams into WorkBuddy, a strategic product hailed as a potential third flagship after QQ and WeChat. Alibaba is merging its QoderWork, Wukong, and MuleRun agents into a new "Qianwen Office" platform under DingTalk's leadership. ByteDance rebranded its TRAE SOLO coding agent to TRAE Work, signaling a broader focus on workflow collaboration. This convergence marks a pivotal industry consensus. The initial exploration phase, where companies rapidly built numerous overlapping agents for different scenarios, proved costly and inefficient. With open-source tools eroding technical barriers, competition has shifted from agent creation to resource consolidation and cost control. Historically, platform wars are won not by creating more products, but by simplifying them—as seen with browsers unifying web access and super-apps consolidating services. Now, the "super workbench" aims to become the unified AI entry point for work. This reflects a deeper market realization: the primary audience for AI is no longer just programmers (a market in the tens of millions) but all knowledge workers (a market of billions). The real opportunity lies in augmenting everyday tasks—managing emails, documents, data, and meetings—across the entire workday. The core battleground is becoming control over the primary AI entry point that employees use daily. Tencent's WorkBuddy leverages WeChat and Tencent Docs; Alibaba's Qianwen Office taps into DingTalk's organizational data; ByteDance's TRAE Work integrates with Feishu's workflows. Whoever owns this "super workbench" gains strategic control over orchestrating enterprise data and APIs. This shift is redefining enterprise software. Traditional SaaS applications, valued for their user interfaces, will recede into the background. Their core functionalities will be exposed as standardized "Skills" or APIs for the super workbench's agents to invoke. Software value will shift from selling user seats to charging based on API calls and outcomes delivered. The evolution of agents is moving through clear stages: first as novel standalone products, then as consolidated primary work entry points, and finally as pervasive, invisible capabilities embedded into the digital fabric. The recent moves by major tech firms signal the transition from the first stage into the second, accelerating toward the third. In the end, the most successful agent technology may become invisible—like electricity or the HTTP protocol—a fundamental, unnamed infrastructure powering work itself.

marsbitHace 3 min(s)

Agent Race Ends, Super Workbench Takes Over

marsbitHace 3 min(s)

Michael Saylor: 110 Reasons to Oppose BIP-110

Michael Saylor presents 110 arguments against Bitcoin Improvement Proposal (BIP) 110, a soft fork aimed at restricting certain non-monetary data storage uses (like inscriptions) on the Bitcoin blockchain. He acknowledges the proponents' valid concerns—such as node costs, fee pressure, and preserving Bitcoin's monetary focus—but fundamentally disagrees with the proposed solution. Saylor argues that BIP 110 represents a dangerous precedent of using consensus rules to enforce value judgments on transaction validity, moving away from Bitcoin's core principles of neutrality and permissionless innovation. His key objections are organized into eleven categories: 1) It violates neutrality and hard consensus by banning currently valid transactions. 2) It fails to meet the high burden of proof required for a consensus change, lacking concrete data on the alleged crisis. 3) Its seven bundled technical restrictions are overly broad, targeting generic script functionalities and blocking future upgrade paths. 4) It sacrifices compatibility and future optionality by closing off designed upgrade hooks. 5) Its temporary rules add significant complexity (grandfathering, expiry states) without sufficient justification. 6) The economic and security impacts, particularly on miner revenue and fee markets, are uncertain and unmodeled. 7) Superior, market-based tools (fee markets, relay/mining policies) already exist to manage blockchain load. 8) It stifles innovation by creating a chilling effect for developers. 9) Its modified activation mechanism (55% threshold, forced signaling) is aggressive and risks network splits. 10) The precedent it sets—using consensus to suppress disliked but legal uses—is more dangerous than the problem it aims to solve. 11) A better path exists: improving measurements, refining resource-based policies, and allowing market forces to work. Saylor concludes that Bitcoin's strength lies in its neutral rules, open markets, and hard consensus. Changing these foundational elements to target specific use cases is an unnecessary and risky "iatrogenic" intervention. He advocates for guarding Bitcoin's neutrality rather than acting as its redeemer.

marsbitHace 19 min(s)

Michael Saylor: 110 Reasons to Oppose BIP-110

marsbitHace 19 min(s)

Trading

Spot
活动图片