Original | Odaily Planet Daily ( @OdailyChina )
Author | Ethan ( @ethanzhang_web 3 )
On July 30th , Eastern Time, the White House officially released its "Digital Asset Policy Report." This article provides a quick overview of five key conclusions and two remaining questions , and offers insights into regulatory and business implications and next steps. (The report cited in this article is the official version .)
Five major conclusions
1) Stablecoins “go through payment channels” and clearly define and regulate boundaries:
The report provides a legal definition of a "payment stablecoin": one used for payment/clearance, redeemable at a fixed amount, and "not a national currency, not a deposit, and not a security." It also explicitly defines (licensed) stablecoin issuers as "financial institutions" under the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) and requires overseas issuers to be subject to freeze/confiscation orders in U.S. law enforcement scenarios. This means that stablecoins are categorized as payment and anti-money laundering/counter-terrorist financing frameworks, rather than as securities issuance channels.
2) Bank "unfreezing" and access acceleration:
Pre-regulatory filings and joint "risk" warnings have been withdrawn, and "reputational risk" is no longer a checkpoint. Applications for master accounts must specify a specific deadline; applications submitted after the deadline will be deemed approved. Eligibility cannot be denied solely based on involvement in digital asset business . For the industry, this directly impacts the availability and predictability of bank custody, clearing, and payment services .
3) Market structure provides a “toolbox”:
The SEC/CFTC are recommended to use rulemaking and exemptions to provide limited-time "safe harbors" or exemptions for projects that are not yet fully functional or decentralized . They are also recommended to allow trading of digital assets unrelated to investment contracts or that do not constitute securities under certain conditions on non-SEC-registered platforms (subject to supporting conditions). They are also recommended to explore regulatory sandboxes with clear entry and graduation paths. This approach aims to bring all aspects of financing, trading, custody, and clearing under unified regulation, avoiding a one-size-fits-all approach.
4) Tax path: “Write digital assets into the law” and complete key rules such as wash sales.
The working group recommends that Congress include digital assets as a new asset category in the reformed securities/commodity tax system; expand the "wash sale rules" (§1091) and "constructive sales" (§1259) to apply to digital assets; and for payment stablecoins, tend to discuss them according to the debt instrument path and exempt/optimize the application of relevant wash sale and anti-bearer bond provisions to avoid unnecessary compliance friction in daily payment links.
5) The institutionalization of “Bitcoin reserves/digital asset inventories” at the national level:
The Treasury Department has submitted to the White House its considerations on how to gradually increase its holdings without increasing taxpayer burden (budget neutrality), including custody security and operational paths. The next step will be to work with the White House and the working group to advance the implementation of "reserve and inventory." The report did not disclose the size of the holdings or the timeline .
Two suspense
Suspense A: The specific value of the United States’ “Bitcoin assets” has not yet been given.
While the mechanism and division of labor for the "Strategic Bitcoin Reserve/Digital Asset Inventory" are documented, the report does not disclose the current balance of BTC available to the federal government, nor does it provide a regular disclosure schedule . The White House's simultaneous release of the facts and the interpretations of various media outlets on the same day also failed to provide verifiable details on the balance or procurement cadence . Any subsequent disclosures from the Treasury Department will be a key focus for market and policy monitoring .
Suspense B: Cross-border mutual recognition and equivalence details.
The report emphasizes that global regulatory fragmentation will weaken the reliability of stablecoins as a "monetary tool" and proposes the need for coordination in payment, interoperability, governance, privacy and other aspects. However, the operational-level arrangements for cross-border license mutual recognition/equivalence remain blank, which means that issuers and cross-border platforms still need to comply with local rules in the short term.
Why does it matter and who does it affect?
The report first clarifies the regulatory boundaries of stablecoins from "whether they can be issued" to "how to operate in compliance as a payment tool."
For issuers, as long as they improve the quality and transparency of their reserves, establish redemption commitments, and pre-set procedures for responding to US-related freeze and seizure orders in accordance with the payment and BSA systems, payment and clearing products will have a viable compliance path. At the same time, uncertainty on the banking side has been significantly reduced : pre-registration and "reputational risk" barriers have been removed, and master account applications are now required to set clear deadlines, with overdue applications deemed approved. This has given businesses such as custody, collection and payment, and on-chain payments room to restart and expand. At the capital market level, limited-time safe harbors/sandboxes and trading platform adaptation mechanisms provide a "trial run-disclosure-graduation" institutional channel for projects that gradually deliver functionality or gradually decentralize, reducing the structural risk of "violating regulations before implementation."
Regarding specific responses, stablecoin issuers need to complete reserve disclosures, monthly reporting, and redemption commitments, similar to those for payment instruments, and integrate cross-border law enforcement coordination into internal control processes. Banks and custodians should simultaneously assess the feasibility of resuming custody services and expanding on-chain payments, facilitate master account applications, refine risk management strategies, and monitor updates to third-party/sub-custodian and technical best practices. Trading platforms and developers can proactively prepare disclosure materials on token economics, governance permissions, upgrades, and emergency response mechanisms, focusing on safe harbor/sandbox thresholds, deadlines, and graduation paths, to align with compliance requirements. Tax and finance teams should proactively research the applicability of rules such as wash sales and constructive sales, refine the tax treatment of crypto lending and stablecoins, and implement a timetabled transformation of 1099 reporting and cost-basis systems to ensure smooth tax reporting and audit processes.
Next step to observe (where to look?)
The next thing to look at is the rhythm of implementation from principles to operations , with the core focusing on four lines:
First, regarding the banking side of the equation. The Federal Reserve, OCC, and FDIC must establish enforceable procedures for "master account" approval deadlines and the deeming of overdue approvals . They must also clarify that blanket rejections based on "involving digital asset business" are prohibited. Statistics on acceptance volume and average processing time must also be disclosed. Furthermore, references to reputational risk in inspection manuals should be completely eliminated to avoid the de facto dissuading of applicants.
Second, market structure pilots. The SEC/CFTC is expected to initiate a public comment period or a small-scale pilot program on safe harbors/sandboxes , detailing operational regulations and disclosure requirements for ATSs/brokers/custodians/transfer agents involved in the parallel trading of non-securities digital assets and traditional securities, and provide a clear path from “entry-trial-graduation”.
Third, the operationalization of the national digital asset reserve. The Ministry of Finance needs to roll out a comprehensive set of processes for source receipt, custody structure, accounting, and governance , and decide whether to establish a regular disclosure process and cadence . This will directly impact market expectations of the national digital asset reserve and policy certainty.
Fourth, Congressional coordination. Legislative efforts will promote the subsequent negotiation and implementation of stablecoins (implementation support for GENIUS) , clarity (market structure), and anti-CBDC approaches. The report clearly states that CBDC will not be promoted .
Which one is implemented first will determine the order in which the funding "blockades" are removed; if the main account and market structure tools are clarified first, fiat currency deposits and withdrawals and compliant liquidity will benefit first.
Conclusion
This 166-page report moves US digital asset policy from a "gray area" into an "actionable zone . " Its main themes are clear: using payment stablecoins and the BSA as the backbone, restoring bank-side access, improving market structure through the use of SEC/CFTC regulations, addressing institutional gaps with a progressive tax system, and explicitly not promoting CBDCs.
At the same time, what remains undecided is not the attitude, but the implementation : the specific rules for master accounts and safe harbors/sandboxes, the technical caliber of cross-border equivalence, and whether a disclosure mechanism for "national digital asset reserves" will be established. The speed of implementation of these details in the coming months will determine the pace of compliance marketization in the United States and the spillover effects of the US dollar stablecoin.
In general, the route is clear and the red lines are clear, and the market is still waiting for a "verifiable timetable."
- 核心观点:美国数字资产监管框架进入可操作阶段。
- 关键要素:
- 稳定币明确纳入支付与反洗钱监管。
- 银行接入数字资产限制放宽,主账户审批提速。
- SEC/CFTC将提供限时安全港与沙盒机制。
- 市场影响:合规路径清晰化,市场流动性有望提升。
- 时效性标注:中期影响。
