The U.S. has neither completely allowed cryptocurrencies to run free nor attempted to suppress their development; instead, it has reshaped regulation, leadership, and market infrastructure.
Article Author: Tiger Research
Source: PANews
(Original Article Title: One Year into the Trump Administration, the Transformation of the U.S. Cryptocurrency Industry)
In 2025, the U.S. government is implementing a policy to support cryptocurrencies with a clear goal: to regulate the existing cryptocurrency industry in the same way as traditional finance.
Key Summary
The United States is committed to integrating cryptocurrencies into its existing financial infrastructure rather than simply absorbing the entire industry.
Over the past year, Congress, the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) have gradually integrated cryptocurrencies into this system by introducing and adjusting rules.
Despite the tensions among regulatory agencies, the U.S. continues to refine its regulatory framework while supporting industry growth.
1. U.S. absorption of the cryptocurrency industry
After President Trump's re-election, the government introduced a series of radical pro-cryptocurrency policies. This marks a sharp turn from the past stance—previously, the cryptocurrency industry was primarily viewed as a target for regulation and control. The U.S. has entered a phase that was once unimaginable, incorporating the cryptocurrency industry into its existing system at a nearly unilateral decision-making pace.
The shift in positions of the SEC and CFTC, along with traditional financial institutions venturing into cryptocurrency-related businesses, signals that broad structural changes are taking place.
Notably, all of this occurred just a year after President Trump's re-election. What specific changes have taken place in the U.S. at the regulatory and policy levels so far?
2. The Year of Change in U.S. Cryptocurrency Stance
In 2025, with the inauguration of the Trump administration, U.S. cryptocurrency policy underwent a significant turning point. The executive branch, Congress, and regulatory agencies acted in concert, focusing on reducing market uncertainty and integrating cryptocurrencies into the existing financial infrastructure.
2.1. U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission
In the past, the SEC primarily relied on enforcement actions to address cryptocurrency-related activities. In major cases involving Ripple, Coinbase, Binance, and Kraken staking services, the SEC filed lawsuits without providing clear standards regarding the legal attributes of tokens or which activities were permitted, often basing its enforcement on post-facto interpretations. This led cryptocurrency enterprises to focus more on managing regulatory risks rather than business expansion.
This position began to shift after the resignation of SEC Chairman Gary Gensler, who held a conservative stance on the cryptocurrency industry. Under the leadership of Paul Atkins, the SEC moved towards a more open approach, starting to build foundational rules aimed at incorporating the cryptocurrency industry into the regulatory framework rather than relying solely on litigation for regulation.
A key example is the announcement of the 'Crypto Project.' Through this project, the SEC has expressed its intent: to establish clear standards to define which tokens are securities and which are not. This once directionless regulatory agency is beginning to reshape itself into a more inclusive body.
2.2. U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission
Source: Tiger Research
In the past, the CFTC's involvement in cryptocurrencies was largely limited to the regulation of the derivatives market. However, this year, it has taken a more proactive stance, formally recognizing Bitcoin and Ethereum as commodities and supporting traditional institutions in using them.
The 'Digital Asset Collateral Pilot Program' is a key initiative. Through this program, Bitcoin, Ethereum, and USDC are authorized as collateral for derivatives trading. The CFTC applied haircut ratios and risk management standards to treat these assets similarly to traditional collateral.
This shift indicates that the CFTC no longer views crypto assets purely as speculative tools but has begun recognizing them as stable collateral assets that can stand alongside traditional financial assets.
2.3. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency
Source: Tiger Research
In the past, the OCC maintained a distance from the cryptocurrency industry. Cryptocurrency businesses had to apply for licenses state by state, making it difficult to enter the federal banking regulatory system, limiting business expansion, and structurally hindering connections to the traditional financial system, forcing most to operate outside the regulated framework.
Now, this practice has changed. The OCC has chosen to integrate cryptocurrency companies into the existing banking regulatory framework rather than exclude them from the financial system. It has issued a series of interpretive letters (formal documents clarifying whether specific financial activities are allowed) to gradually expand the scope of permitted activities, including crypto asset custody, trading, and even bank payment chain transaction fees.
This series of reforms culminated in December: the OCC conditionally approved national trust bank charters for major companies like Circle and Ripple. This is significant because it grants these crypto companies the same status as traditional financial institutions. Under unified federal regulation, they can operate nationwide, and transfers that previously required intermediary banks can now be processed directly like traditional banks.
2.4. Legislation and Executive Orders
Source: Tiger Research
In the past, the U.S. had begun formulating stablecoin legislation as early as 2022, but repeated delays caused a regulatory vacuum in the market. There were no clear standards regarding reserve composition, regulatory authority, or issuance requirements, making it unreliable for investors to verify whether issuers held sufficient reserves, raising concerns about the transparency of some issuers' reserves.
(GENIUS Act) addresses these issues by clearly defining the requirements for stablecoin issuance and reserve standards. It requires issuers to hold reserves equal to 100% of the issued amount and prohibits re-mortgaging of reserve assets while unifying regulatory authority under federal financial regulatory agencies.
As a result, stablecoins have become legally recognized digital dollars with guaranteed payment capabilities.
3. Direction Established, Competition and Checks Coexist
In the past year, the direction of U.S. cryptocurrency policy has been clear: integrating the cryptocurrency industry into the formal financial system. However, this process has not been uniform and frictionless.
Disagreements still exist within the U.S. Internal perspectives are divided. The debate around the privacy-mixing service Tornado Cash is a typical example: the executive branch actively enforces the law under the pretext of blocking illegal fund flows, while the SEC chairman publicly warns against over-restricting privacy. This indicates that there is no complete consensus within the U.S. government regarding cryptocurrency.
However, these disagreements do not equate to policy instability; they are more akin to inherent characteristics of the U.S. decision-making system. Agencies with different responsibilities interpret issues from their own perspectives, sometimes publicly expressing dissent, and move forward in a balance of checks and persuasion. The tension between strict enforcement and protecting innovation may bring short-term friction, but in the long run, it helps make regulatory standards increasingly specific and precise.
The key is that this tension has not stalled the process. Even amid the debate, the U.S. is advancing on multiple fronts simultaneously: the SEC's rule-making, the CFTC's infrastructure integration, the OCC's institutional absorption, and congressional legislation establishing standards. It does not wait for complete consensus but allows competition and coordination to proceed in parallel, driving the system forward.
Ultimately, the U.S. has neither completely laissez-faire regarding cryptocurrencies nor attempted to suppress their development, but has restructured regulation, leadership, and market infrastructure simultaneously. By transforming internal debates and tensions into momentum, the U.S. has chosen a strategy to draw the global cryptocurrency industry center towards itself.
The past year has been crucial because this direction has transcended declarations and has been concretely transformed into specific policies and implementations.
