Crypto rules are finally in place. The year 2026 will be about making them work.
After years of regulatory uncertainty, the US crypto sector now has a concrete legal framework. Two years of continuous reform have produced a set of rules that companies and practitioners are only beginning to implement. The hard work lies ahead.
A Regulatory Framework Finally in Place
The transformation has been gradual but considerable. The Financial Accounting Standards Board (FASB) led the way with ASU 2023-08, allowing in-scope crypto assets to be recorded on balance sheets at fair value. Congress followed with the GENIUS Act, establishing a federal framework for payment stablecoins. The IRS modernized crypto tax reporting with the new Form 1099-DA.
This emerging regulatory architecture is significant. But the work of turning rules into operational compliance and functional oversight is just beginning. Companies and practitioners should expect 2026 to be less about crafting new regulations and more about refining, connecting, and operationalizing the ones in place.
The Five Token Categories Defined by SEC and CFTC
March 17, 2026 marks a historic date for the American crypto sector. The Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), joined by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), issued a joint interpretation establishing a clear taxonomy for digital assets.
This taxonomy divides crypto assets into five distinct categories:
- Digital commodities: Bitcoin and Ethereum, which are not considered securities
- Digital collectibles: NFTs and unique digital assets
- Digital tools: utility tokens serving specific functionalities
- Payment stablecoins: assets designed for everyday transactions
- Digital securities: tokenized financial assets under SEC jurisdiction
This classification is not merely descriptive. It clearly establishes jurisdiction between the SEC and CFTC, offering market participants a concrete starting point for analyzing the regulatory compliance of each digital asset.
What This Means for Bitcoin and Ethereum
The most anticipated part of this interpretation concerned the status of Bitcoin and Ethereum. The document officially confirms what many market participants have long suspected: the two largest cryptos by market capitalization are not themselves securities.
After more than a decade of uncertainty, this interpretation will provide market participants with a clear understanding of how the Commission treats crypto assets under federal securities laws, said SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins. It also acknowledges what the former administration refused to recognize: that most crypto assets are not themselves securities.
This clarification answers a long-standing industry demand. For years, crypto companies suffered from a lack of regulatory clarity, which prevented them from effectively planning their development and expansion strategies.
Staking and Mining Clarified
The interpretation also addresses activities that were in total regulatory limbo: staking, mining, and wrapping of crypto assets.
Regarding staking, the SEC and CFTC established that generating rewards through proof-of-stake staking does not in itself constitute an offering of securities. Staking Receipt Tokens representing non-security digital assets are not subject to securities laws, provided they meet certain conditions.
Similarly, crypto mining activities are not considered transactions involving securities. This clarification is particularly important for Bitcoin miners and node operators who generate revenue through their network participation.
The GENIUS Act Enters Implementation Phase
Alongside the SEC-CFTC interpretation, the GENIUS Act is entering a crucial phase of its implementation. Several federal agencies have published their proposed rules during the first quarter of 2026.
FDIC Reserve Requirements
On April 7, 2026, the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC) Board of Directors approved a notice of proposed rulemaking establishing requirements and standards applicable to FDIC-supervised permitted payment stablecoin issuers (PPSIs).
This proposal covers requirements related to reserve assets, redemption, capital, and risk management standards. It applies to insured banks, insured branches of foreign institutions, and PPSIs for which FDIC is the primary regulatory agency.
OCC Rules on Capital Requirements
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) also published its proposals to implement the GENIUS Act. Contrary to some market participants’ expectations, the OCC does not propose to establish standardized minimum capital requirements for PPSIs.
Due to the novelty of payment stablecoins and various business models for stablecoin issuers being discussed among industry participants, the OCC believes that setting capital requirements based on individual evaluations of prospective PPSIs would be most appropriate at this stage, the proposal states.
The OCC also clarifies that it would focus primarily on the operational risk of PPSIs, believing that other risks such as credit risk, market risk, and interest rate risk are either minimal in the case of PPSIs or addressed through other aspects of the proposal.
FinCEN and OFAC Publish Anti-Money Laundering Rules
On April 8, 2026, the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) and the Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) issued a joint proposed rule to implement the GENIUS Act’s anti-money laundering and sanctions compliance program requirements.
This proposal treats permitted payment stablecoin issuers as financial institutions for purposes of the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA). They must maintain an effective sanctions compliance program and comply with reporting and recordkeeping obligations.
President Trump is strengthening American leadership in digital financial technology, said Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. This proposal will protect the US financial system from national security threats without hindering American companies’ ability to forge ahead in the payment stablecoin ecosystem.
Accounting Challenges Persist
Despite these significant regulatory advances, important accounting questions remain unanswered. The FASB’s ASU 2023-08 standard is a major milestone, but its scope remains narrow.
The rule applies only to fungible, cryptographically secured, blockchain-hosted tokens whose value derives solely from their existence on a distributed ledger and that confer no enforceable rights. While this definition captures Bitcoin and Ethereum, it excludes several of the market’s fastest-growing segments.
The Case of Stablecoins
Stablecoins are a prominent example. Their market is expanding rapidly under the GENIUS Act, but ASU 2023-08 does not address them. Companies are asking whether stablecoins qualify as cash equivalents, an increasingly urgent question as adoption accelerates.
The rule also excludes token types (self-issued, wrapped, and non-fungible tokens) and decentralized finance (DeFi) activities where accounting ambiguity is greatest.
DeFi Activities Remain in Limbo
Crypto-native activities raise questions that traditional finance has never had to confront, notably around control and revenue recognition. They also strain core assumptions in US Generally Accepted Accounting Principles (GAAP).
For instance, the revenue recognition model assumes an identifiable customer, yet in mining or staking, the counterparty is the protocol itself. This dissonance reveals the limits of traditional accounting frameworks facing decentralized digital assets.
Crypto Taxation Put to the Test
Beginning with the 2025 tax year, brokers must report digital asset sales and exchanges on the new Form 1099-DA. Third-party reporting is meant to strengthen compliance, but the regime has two notable gaps.
The Problem of Tracking Cost Basis
Tracking cost basis is especially challenging. Taxpayers must now calculate gains and losses on a wallet-by-wallet basis rather than using the pooled basis under the universal method and apply permitted lot identification rules.
Because crypto assets frequently move across platforms, reconstructing historical basis is difficult and brokers may lack the information needed to produce compliant forms. Brokers will not report basis in 2025 and may do so in later years only when they have complete acquisition data.
DeFi Largely Outside the Reporting Framework
Decentralized finance will remain largely outside the reporting framework. Common on-chain activities, including wrapping, liquidity pool transactions, staking, and lending, are not covered by broker reporting rules.
Activity in non-custodial wallets is likewise out of scope. Consequently, much taxable DeFi income will not appear on a 1099-DA, even when economically meaningful. De minimis thresholds ($10,000 for qualifying stablecoins and $600 for specified NFTs) further limit reportable transactions.
These gaps mean taxpayers will continue to bear primary responsibility for tracking cost basis, monitoring on-chain activity, and reporting all taxable events, whether or not a form is issued. 2026 will be the first real test of whether the 1099 reporting regime provides the broker-taxpayer reconciliation needed to strengthen compliance.
What This Means for the Market
This dual regulatory development sends a clear signal to the market: the United States is moving from a phase of regulatory abstention to a phase of digital asset normalization. For the first time, crypto market participants have a coherent framework for assessing their regulatory obligations.
For established crypto companies, this means an end to the uncertainty that has hindered institutional investment. For new entrants, it offers a clear path to developing their products within a defined legal framework.
However, the practical implementation of these rules will take time. Companies will need to develop documented, repeatable internal controls for classifying digital assets, periodically reassessing their classifications as circumstances change, and demonstrating a solid audit trail to their auditors and regulators.
Token classification becomes an internal control design question, not solely a legal determination. This is a fundamental change in how the industry must approach regulatory compliance.
Implications for Crypto Companies
For companies in the crypto sector, this new regulatory landscape requires a complete overhaul of their compliance approach. Legal and financial teams must now work together to establish robust procedures for asset classification and regulatory obligation tracking.
Companies that neglect these requirements expose themselves to significant risks. American regulators have demonstrated over the past years their willingness to use all tools at their disposal to enforce rules. Fines and sanctions against crypto companies have multiplied, and this trend should continue in the new regulatory environment.
The Importance of Documentation
A crucial aspect of the new regulatory compliance lies in documentation. Companies must be able to prove to their auditors and regulators that their asset classifications are based on rigorous, repeatable analyses.
This means developing formalized internal processes, maintaining detailed records of classification decisions, and being capable of demonstrating how each digital asset was evaluated in accordance with the framework established by SEC and CFTC.
Outlook for 2026 and Beyond
The year 2026 will be decisive in shaping how these rules will be applied in practice. Federal agencies continue to publish their proposed rules, and the sector must prepare for a stricter compliance environment.
Companies that invest now in robust asset classification systems and compliance tracking will be better positioned than their competitors to navigate this new environment. Those who wait risk being overwhelmed by the growing complexity of the regulatory landscape.
For individual investors, these developments offer greater legal certainty, but also new reporting obligations. Monitoring one’s own on-chain activity and accurately reporting taxable events become unavoidable responsibilities.
The US crypto regulatory framework is now in place. 2026 will be the year when the industry learns to live with these new rules and integrate them into daily operations. Those who can adapt to this new reality will be best positioned to thrive in tomorrow’s digital economy.
« » »
