Disclosure: The views and opinions expressed here belong solely to the author and do not represent the views and opinions of crypto.news’ editorial.
While the EU has been working on regulating digital assets since early discussions in 2020 and now leads with the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA), the U.S. has avoided enacting specific crypto laws for years. Instead, it relied on applying existing statutes to the digital space.
This “made room” for the crypto world to exist, but it was hardly easy. Uncertainty drove companies and individuals to more crypto-friendly jurisdictions. Under the Biden administration, regulatory pressure — commonly referred to as Operation Choke Point 2.0 — even discouraged banks from servicing the digital asset industry.
This year, the U.S. is suddenly everywhere in crypto news, making headlines. President Donald Trump made clear that digital finance had become a federal priority. Following this, three key bills landed in Congress: the CLARITY Act, the GENIUS Act, and the Anti-CBDC Surveillance State Act. Together, they push the U.S. closer to a crypto framework that could resemble the EU’s recognition and categorization of digital assets.
The CLARITY Act (proposed) seeks to create a federal framework for digital commodities under joint SEC and CFTC oversight. Its innovation is the suggested “investment contract asset” concept, which means that a token initially treated as a security can shift to commodity status once decentralized and mature. It sets categories like Digital Commodities, Digital Assets that remain securities, and Permitted Payment Stablecoins, and rules for custody, transactions, AML, and international cooperation.
The GENIUS Act, enacted in July 2025, imposes strict licensing for stablecoin issuers, like the 1:1 backing with safe liquid assets, monthly reserve reports, AML compliance, no interest to holders, and redemption rights if an issuer fails. MiCA has similar provisions for asset-referenced and e-money tokens, but applies them under a single license across the EU.
The Anti-CBDC Act, which has already passed the U.S. House of Representatives but is not yet law, takes a different tack, aiming to ban any U.S. central bank digital currency outright. By contrast, the EU is actively exploring a digital euro under ECB oversight.
The U.S. is now focusing on three key points: asset categories, stablecoin reserve requirements, and consumer protection. It is impossible not to compare this to the EU’s framework, which is recognized as an integrated system, while the proposed U.S. approach remains fragmented and agency-driven. For issuers, the EU offers one clear route to compliance, while the U.S., even with this new intended framework, would require navigating multiple regulators, though the gap may narrow.
That said, while two of the acts remain proposals and the framework looks fragmented, agencies are already stepping in to fill the gaps by issuing specific regulations. The SEC has already moved: in July, it approved Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) exchange-traded products to operate with “in-kind” creations and redemptions, aligning them with commodity-based ETPs like gold. SEC Chairman Paul S. Atkins called it a step toward a “fit-for-purpose” framework. Meanwhile, Nasdaq has asked the SEC to approve trading of tokenized securities, with clear labeling so clearing houses and the Depository Trust Company can process them like conventional stocks. If adopted, blockchain technology would shift from the periphery to the core of equity markets.
The big picture is clear: after years of avoidance, the U.S. is now building a regulatory structure for digital assets. It is not yet as unified as Europe’s, but it is suddenly moving fast. For the leaders of the industry, this is both a challenge and an opportunity: to adapt to evolving rules while shaping how the U.S. positions itself in the global digital economy.
