The Washington Power of the Crypto Sphere

marsbitОпубліковано о 2026-03-04Востаннє оновлено о 2026-03-04

Анотація

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).

Пов'язані питання

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.

Пов'язані матеріали

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

The article argues that blockchain's fundamental limitation is not the scalability trilemma (decentralization, scalability, security), which has been largely solved, but the lack of **privacy** and, until recently, clear **legitimacy**. Blockchain is described as a slow, expensive, globally shared computer whose core value is censorship resistance and verifiability. While ideal for native digital assets like money (e.g., stablecoins), its default transparency acts as a **tax**, exposing all transactions and enabling MEV extraction, which deters serious institutional capital. Simultaneously, its permissionless nature created regulatory ambiguity. The piece contends that **privacy** is the missing critical feature. It rejects the false choice between total transparency and complete anonymity. Modern cryptography (like zero-knowledge proofs) enables **compliant privacy**: users can prove facts (solvency, KYC status, compliance) without revealing the underlying sensitive data (specific holdings, identities). This preserves auditability for regulators and eliminates the leak of financial information. With recent regulatory progress (e.g., the GENIUS Act) addressing legitimacy, adding default, provably compliant privacy becomes a pure upgrade. It transforms blockchain from a costly, public ledger into a confidential settlement layer, finally bridging the gap to mainstream institutional and individual adoption of on-chain finance.

链捕手4 год тому

The "Impossible Triad" Is Fundamentally a Pseudo-Problem

链捕手4 год тому

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

The global optical chip industry is experiencing a massive wave of expansion driven by surging AI data center demand. Major players across the US, Japan, Europe, and China are aggressively investing to ramp up production capacity. In the US, Coherent is expanding its 6-inch Indium Phosphide (InP) semiconductor fab in Texas, supported by CHIPS Act funding and a $2 billion strategic investment from NVIDIA. Lumentum is building a new factory for InP optical devices, and Nokia is scaling its advanced photonic chip packaging and testing capabilities. NVIDIA's investments aim to secure future supply of critical lasers and optical interconnect products for AI infrastructure. Japan's JX Advanced Metals, a leading InP substrate supplier, plans a multi-billion yen investment to increase its capacity 7-10 times, strengthening its grip on the crucial upstream materials market. In Europe, IQE and Tower Semiconductor settled a patent dispute and signed a multi-year InP epitaxial wafer supply agreement, highlighting that next-generation silicon photonics platforms will integrate high-performance InP components. STMicroelectronics and Sivers Semiconductors are also expanding silicon photonics production and partnerships. China is rapidly building out its domestic supply chain. Dongshan Precision's subsidiary, Source Photonics, announced a $12 billion project to expand optical chip and module production. Companies like Sanan Optoelectronics and Yunnan Germanium are scaling up InP chip manufacturing and substrate production, moving towards vertical integration from materials to modules. While debate continues around the exact future architecture—whether CPO (Co-Packaged Optics), NPO, or pluggables will dominate—analysts like Morgan Stanley argue the underlying driver is unchangeable: the explosive growth in bandwidth demand. This will inevitably increase the volume of optical engines, lasers, and related content per GPU, regardless of the final technical path. The competition for "more light" in the AI era has intensified into a global, full-chain capacity race.

marsbit7 год тому

Optical Chips: Collective Capacity Expansion

marsbit7 год тому

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

Stablecoin Real Yield Found: A Deep Dive into On-Chain Reinsurance with Re's Karan Saroya As stablecoin supply exceeds $170 billion, the search for sustainable, non-speculative yield intensifies. Re, an on-chain reinsurance platform, provides an answer: connecting stablecoin capital to the trillion-dollar traditional reinsurance market. Re operates as a regulated reinsurer, accepting stablecoin deposits as collateral to back US insurance companies. These insurers pay premiums, generating yield that flows back to on-chain depositors. Currently supporting 35 insurers and underwriting $500 million, Re projects scaling to over $1 billion soon. Key insights from a Bankless podcast with founder Karan Saroya and investor Avichal of Electric Capital: 1. **Uncorrelated, Real-World Yield:** Re offers stablecoin holders access to reinsurance returns (targeting 12-14%+), an asset class entirely separate from crypto or equity markets. 2. **Operational Efficiency via Smart Contracts:** Re replaces traditional, labor-intensive capital fundraising with smart contracts, allowing a ~12-person team to compete with industry giants. 3. **Regulatory Leverage:** For every $1 of collateral, regulations allow backing $5-7 in written premiums. This leverage amplifies returns from the underlying risk-free rate. 4. **DeFi Integration:** Depositors receive receipt tokens, which can be used in protocols like Morpho for "looping," potentially pushing yields to 18-20%+. 5. **The "DeFi Mullet" Model:** A compliant front-end (regulated reinsurer) paired with a decentralized back-end (smart contracts, DeFi capital markets). 6. **RE Governance Token:** Modeled on Lloyd's of London, the token governs the central capital pool's allocation, counterparty acceptance, and parameters. 7. **Real Economic Impact:** Capital funds real-world productivity (factories, clinics, businesses) via insurance, moving beyond crypto's internal loops. The discussion highlights a pivotal moment: DeFi's supply-side infrastructure is now met by real demand for productive yield, potentially kickstarting a flywheel where vast on-chain stablecoin capital seeks these real-world returns.

链捕手8 год тому

Stablecoins Finally Find Real Yield: An In-Depth Look at On-Chain Reinsurance Re | A Conversation with Re Founder Karan Saroya

链捕手8 год тому

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

"1996 or 1999? Wall's First Big Test Is 'How to View AI'" Federal Reserve Chairman Wall's initial challenge is not whether to raise or cut rates, but a more fundamental judgment: what kind of boom is the current AI boom? This will determine the Fed's policy path and define his legacy. Economics is split between two opposing views, according to reporter Nick Timiraos. One sees imminent productivity gains that will increase supply and cool inflation, allowing the Fed to hold steady. The other argues that while productivity benefits are distant, demand shocks are here now, and waiting for data confirmation risks missing the intervention window, forcing sharper rate hikes later. Wall has signaled a leaning toward the first view, echoing 1996-era Alan Greenspan, who embraced strong, productivity-driven growth without fear of inflation. However, Wall faces a different macro environment than Greenspan did, with tariff pressures, expanding fiscal deficits, and diminishing globalization benefits, which could force more significant inflation pressures even if AI benefits materialize. Wall's logic, expressed before taking office, is that AI-driven productivity gains won't show in official data for years. If the Fed waits for confirmation, it might mistakenly tighten policy and choke off the very growth that could suppress inflation. This argues for using forward-looking narratives over lagging data. Chicago Fed President Austan Goolsbee presents a key counter-argument. He distinguishes between expected and unexpected productivity booms. A widely anticipated boom, like the current AI wave, can cause people to spend future wealth gains in advance, overheating the economy before productivity actually rises, thus requiring preemptive rate hikes. He cites rising costs for AI data centers as evidence of such overheating. Fed Governor Christopher Waller offers a rebuttal to Goolsbee, noting the "expected spending" mechanism only works if people can borrow against future income, which many households cannot do due to borrowing constraints. Wall also faces a paradox related to his desire to reduce the Fed's use of "forward guidance" (pre-announcing policy moves). This practice was established in 1999 when Greenspan began signaling hikes to avoid market shocks. If the economy follows a less optimistic path, Wall may be forced to choose between using the guidance he wants to abolish or risking market volatility by staying silent. The ultimate question defining Wall's first major test remains: Is this 1996 or 1999?

marsbit9 год тому

1996 or 1999? Walsh's First Test is 'How to View AI'

marsbit9 год тому

Торгівля

Спот
Ф'ючерси
活动图片