The Crypto 2025 political landscape: imminent divergences of the EU and the United States?

The policy on digital assets begins 2025 in a familiar place: the United States and Europe prioritize different ways to digital finance. The issues could not be higher. These political decisions occur in the midst of increasing pressure on the world role of the US dollar and an increase in European interests in “economic sovereignty” compared to local payment systems.

Coherent EU policy posture

When the regulation of digital European frames (EU) came into force on December 30, 2024, EU regulatory pillars for the surveillance of cryptographic assets were completed. With the regulation of fund transfer and the Digital Operational Resilience, Micar extends banking rules to stablescoins and cryptocurrencies. Policy deals with financial stability and the risks of consumer protection resulting from cryptocurrencies, most of which are extracted outside the EU. Indeed, the minutes of the monetary policy of the European Central Bank (ECB) indicated that the markets of the American crypto create high risks of financial stability in the EU. ECB’s political decision-makers systematically prefer digital currencies of the Central Bank (CBDC), in the form of a digital euro, on cryptocurrencies to protect strategic autonomy and monetary sovereignty for companies and individuals EU.

Micar applies to the program, marketing and trading of cryptographic assets and related services. Companies that seek to engage in these activities must comply with the regulatory requirements of the banking type, in particular by having an adequate internal risk management and minimum capital requirements. The regulations apply to three types of money issuers (electronic currency), two of which are stablecoins. All electronic money issuers must be approved as an institution of electronic funds or credit institution (that is to say a bank) under the second monetary electronic directive. The emerging EU cryptography industry supported the new framework because it provides legal certainty.

Policy posture in American conflict

The digital currency policy from 2021 to 2024 in the United States was not linear. Dramatic market growth, partisan quarrels and significant losses based on fraud could trigger financial stability problems in the consumer financial sector and concerns about illegal activity in the cryptographic sector in the United States. These trends have seen the United States to support both the Crypto and the CBDC in 2022, in a position of regulatory policy controversial in 2023 that the courts constantly invalidated, to several bills in the congress in 2024. Representatives in representatives 2024, to languish in the Senate.

The new Trump administration has spoken decisively. A new decree indicates a clear policy directly in conflict with the position of the EU. The United States now traces a trajectory of anti-blockchain and anti-CBDC policy on the grounds that CBDC “threaten the stability of individual privacy of the financial system and the sovereignty of the United States”. He also claims that “legitimate and legitimate” stablecoins support “sovereignty of the US dollar”. The training of digital financing policy was raised at the level of the White House through the president’s working group on the digital asset markets. The change of policy will be reinforced by parallel political initiatives Pro-Crypto in the congress and among financial regulators since the November 2024 elections:

• Senatorial Banking Committee: 2025 Legislative priorities include legislation on cryptography and stabriques to guarantee “compliance with any appropriate requirement of the Act respecting banks”.
• Committee of financial services of the Chamber: The first public declaration of the president of Travis Hill promised to “create a regulatory framework for digital assets which will protect investors and consumers while keeping innovation in America”.
• The Chamber and the Senate have announced surveys and audiences on “Goke Point 2.0” regulatory policy initiatives which forced access to the cryptographic sector to the traditional liquidity of the financial sector.
• Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC): In November 2024, the CFTC accelerated the ability to use assets in addition to money as a guarantee by increasing dependence on the technology of the great distributed book.
• Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC): The acting president of the Sec, Mark T. Uyeda, has formed a new working group to accelerate work on a regulatory cryptographic framework. The working group will be led by Commissioner Hester Peirce, who was the leader of the SEC concerning distributed and crypto financing problems.

Potential tension and alignment possibilities

Before the 2024 presidential election, many considered the legal certainty provided by Micar as creating competitive advantages for the emerging markets of the EU cryptography. Some have promoted Thumber as one for cryptographic assets, encouraging the United States, the United Kingdom and other jurisdictions to converge with the EU standard.

The newly issued Decree of the Trump administration clearly indicates that Micar will not provide a model for American decision -makers. The cryptography industry and traditional banking leaders support the initiative to create the first native blockchain policy framework. Participation in the World Economic Forum in Switzerland stressed that legal clarity will accelerate the use of cryptography in the traditional banking system.

Transatlantic regulatory alignment is not impossible. In particular, American initiatives that expand the regulatory perimeter to cover cryptocurrencies and require compliance with the law on banking secrecy could not trigger transatlantic alignment simply because there is no financial regulatory requirement comparable to the States -Unis today. EU alignment with the new American policy is also possible. Indeed, the European Parliament observed that the CBDC digital initiative of the EU Commission is now a long -term aspiration rather than a short -term priority. The differences between the European Commission and the European Securities Markets Authority (ESMA) concerning the next steps of the Throan also suggest that regulations more suitable for the market could emerge. These types of alignment should not be confused with harmonization or transatlantic regulatory convergence, which has been an elusive target for decades in the financial services sector.

1. Market dynamic: American cryptocurrency issuers and intermediaries are currently dominating the EU markets. The joint report of the 2025 European Banking Authority and ESMA on recent developments in Crypto assets indicates that stablecoins based on the USD constitute 90% of market capitalization and more than 70% of commercial volume in Europe. The volume of cryptographic transactions in Europe, instead, has remained 8% since 2022, even if digital payment volumes increase. Political clarity could propel crypto companies to a more dominant position in the world, to the detriment of the emerging markets of cryptographic assets in Europe. EU companies can put pressure on political decision-makers to seek harmonization with the United States accordingly.
2. Market access: Many micro components are against the functioning of cryptographic markets. For example, the distributed nature of connected computers defies traditional regulatory requirements for a local physical subsidiary. The requirements of the local subsidiaries of Thumber could be vulnerable to trade political challenges as non -tariff barriers, in particular in the context of a new US government which promotes the use of trade policy to achieve non -commercial policy objectives. In addition, the anonymity of counterpart based on the blockchain does not align perfectly with Micar or the law on the secret of American banks.
3. Financial stability: The rapid twin insolances in 2023 at Silicon Valley Bank and Silvergate created liquidity pressures both for stablecoins and the traditional banking system. The fight against the risks of financial stability often implies official support for liquidity of the sector in addition to regulatory precautionary monitoring. The first press reports indicate that the United States can create a Bitcoin strategic reserve. Thebitcoin Act of 2024 (S.4912) introduced by Senator Cynthia Lummis proposed a Bitcoin strategic reserve to play the same role as gold reserves. The legislation was silent on the question of whether the reservations could be used to provide support for liquidity to the stressing markets. Such a reserve could create controversy and pressure for comparable strategic reserves worldwide.

The EU privileged crypto policy framework extends the perimeter of the banking regulation designed to limit the risks of financial stability resulting from non -local entities while promoting a regional CBDC. No detail has yet emerged from the United States concerning specific regulatory policy choices. However, American decision -makers have articulated a clear set of priorities which are radically different from the EU. American decision -makers seek to support intermediation based on private sector blockchain while declaring rather than CBDC initiatives create risks of financial stability. High -level political alignment is possible. The differences, animated rhetoric and drama are inevitable.

Hung Tran is a non -resident principal researcher at the Geoeconomics center of the Atlantic Council and Senior Stock Exchange at the Policy Center for the New South; A former senior official of the Institute of International Finance and the International Monetary Fund.

Barbara Matthews is a non -resident main woman at the Geoeconomic Center of the Atlantic Council. She is also founder and CEO of Bcmstrategy, Inc., a company that generates AI training data and signals concerning public policy.

At the intersection of the economy, finance and foreign policy, the Geoeconomic center is a translation center in order to help shape a better world economic future.

Upon reading

Game 23 January 2025

What is the next step in the regulation of cryptography in the United States?

Economical
By
Ananya Kumar

What does success really look like on the regulatory front? What does this mean for the rest of the world? We dive into the dozen bills in consideration at Congress and zoom in on the three major themes of cryptographic regulations in 2025.

Image: US and Euro dollar on the flags of the United States and the European Union.