The first week of the Trump administration experienced notable developments in the regulation of American cryptography. The American Commission for Securities and Exchange has created a new “working group on cryptography”, canceled the accounting advice for controversial personnel on Crypto care and has published new advice on the same subject. Meanwhile, President Trump has published an executive decree that promises a complete review of American cryptography regulations.
On the campaign track, President Trump offered a significant change in posture on the cryptographic regulation of the administration of President Biden. The events of the first week of President Trump’s administration seem to demonstrate a Pro-Crypto turn.
On January 21, the acting president of the SEC, Mark Uyeda, launched a working group on the crypto focused on the clarification of the regulatory framework around cryptographic assets.1 On January 23, the SEC released the staff accounting bulletin n ° 122 (“SAB 122”), canceling the controversial staff accounting bulletin No. 121 (“SAB 121”).2 SAB 121 demanded an entity to safeguard cryptographic assets so that customers have a liabilities on its assessment to reflect its safeguard obligation. On the same day, President Trump signed an executive decree to establish a regulatory clarity for digital financial technology, which created a “presidential working group on digital asset markets” to examine the existing regulations applicable to cryptographic assets and prohibited Federal agencies to create or support the Central Bank Digital Monnaies.3
We briefly sum up each of these actions below.
The dry crypto working group
The president of Acting Sec, Mark Uyeda, created a crypto working group in order to “develop a complete and clear regulatory framework” for cryptographic assets (the “working group”). The working group will be led by Commissioner Hester Peirce and is intended to seek a “reasonable regulatory path” which moves away from an approach perceived as being mainly motivated by application measures.
In its press release, the SEC said that the main objective of the working group will include the establishment of “clear regulatory lines”, providing for realistic paths to registration, the development of disclosure directives and the use of implementing resources judiciously. The working group will operate within the statutory framework provided by the congress and will be coordinated with the congress, because it potentially makes legislative changes to this framework. The working group will also coordinate with the federal departments and agencies, including the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and the counterparts of the States and International.
Sab 121 is removed and replaced by Sab 122
Two days after the creation of its new working group, the SEC canceled Sab 121 and published Sab 122 in its place.
SAB 121 was published in 2022 and declares that “as long as a (company) is responsible for the safeguard of cryptographic assets held for its users of the platform, including the maintenance of the cryptographic key information necessary to access cryptographic assets “, The company should present a responsibility on its assessment to reflect its obligation to protect the cryptographic assets held for its users with a corresponding asset.4 The assets and the liabilities must be recognized at the fair value of the kept cryptographic assets.
The effect of SAB 121 was therefore to move the cryptographic assets kept on the assessment of a goalkeeper – a practice in contradiction with the traditional accounting treatment of kept assets. This has aroused significant criticism from a certain number of established financial services companies, which have sought to withdraw the accounting directives. In particular, the SEC did not submit SAB 121 for general examination under the Congressional Review Act (“CRA”). The arc obliges agencies to report the issuance of rules to the congress and provides the congress with special accelerated procedures under which examining the legislation which reverses a rule.5
The sec has now canceled Sab 121 and issued Sab 122 in its place. In the new bulletin, the SEC note that an entity previously under the obligation to recognize a liabilities in its assessment should now make a decision by applying guidelines under the codification of accounting standards for financial accounting accounting. .
Executive decree on the strengthening of American leadership in digital financial technology
President Trump has signed an executive decree to “establish regulatory clarity” for cryptographic assets (the “crypto eo”).6 The Crypto EO establishes a “presidential working group on the digital asset markets”, chaired by the AI and the Crypto Tsar David Sacks and composed of the Treasury Secretary, President of the SEC, President of the Combo Futures Trading Commission and a number of other agency heads and departments. The working group will be:
- Identify all regulations, guidance documents, orders or other elements that affect the asset sector of cryptography, within 30 days of the date of the Crypto EO.
- Within 60 days of the date of the Crypto EO, submit to the president recommendations of the working group on the question of whether each regulation identified, orientation document, order or other element must be canceled or modified, or adopted by the through a regulation.
- Within 180 days of the date of the Crypto EO, submit a report to the President to recommend regulatory and legislative proposals that advance the policies established in the Crypto EO.
- Propose a federal regulatory framework governing the emission and operation of digital assets, including stablecoins.
- Evaluate the potential creation and maintenance of a stock of national cryptography assets.
In particular, the Crypto EO defines a “digital asset” as “any digital representation of the value recorded on a large distributed book, including cryptocurrencies, digital tokens and stablecoins”. Consequently, and the least in front, the Crypto EO can extend beyond “native” cryptographic assets such as bitcoin and ether to potentially include traditional financial assets (such as shares or obligations) If these are recorded on a blockchain. It remains to be seen how the working group will perform the term. The Crypto EO also prohibits any federal agency from taking measures to establish, issue or promote “digital currencies of the central bank” (“CBDC”), which it defines as “a form of digital money or monetary value , worded in the national unit of account, it is a direct responsibility of the Central Bank. Although very few countries have currently published a CBDC, the Crypto-EO could act to dissuade the development of any future active in this type. The Crypto EO also immediately ends all the current plans or initiatives in any agency linked to the creation of a CBDC in the United States
The Crypto EO follows closely after the adoption of the European Union markets in the regulation of cryptographic assets (“Mica”). Mica envisages recording and a regulated path for cryptographic assets, including “electronic silver tokens” or “monhone tokens”, which are cryptographic assets which aim to stabilize their value by making only one Official currency and which are “electronic substitutes for parts and banknotes and are likely to be used to make payments. »»7 Unlike Mica, the Crypto EO could deny any federal recognition of any electronic frame jet if they are direct responsibility for any central bank.
The Crypto EO also orders government agencies to facilitate the opening of bank accounts. This seems to be a response to complaints within the cryptographic industry of the “speaking”, where cryptographic companies would be denied access to banking services by actions or policies of financial regulators.8 The Supervisory Committee of the United States House has already opened an investigation into these claims and the Senate Banking Committee intended to hold an audience on February 5, 2025.9
Conclusion
The Trump administration and its SEC reported a significant change in cryptographic policy in 2025. The cryptographic industry celebrated last week’s developments, but many regulatory challenges remain. Congress leaders in the House and Senate indicated the desire to adopt legislation on cryptography, but the prospects for future legislation, as well as for the nature of a new regulatory reparation, are still not clear.
