As the final regulatory roundup of 2025 this week’s developments captured a inflection point for US crypto policy showing a shift away from ad-hoc enforcement and toward more structural debates around taxation, banking access and investor protection.
From renewed pressure on the IRS over staking taxes to the Federal Reserve exploring new account models for payment firms, regulators are confronting how digital assets can be integrated into financial frameworks designed for a very different era.
A bipartisan group of 18 US House lawmakers has urged the Internal Revenue Service to revisit how crypto staking rewards are taxed, arguing that current interpretations amount to double taxation and discourage participation in blockchain networks.
In a letter sent to acting IRS commissioner Scott Bessent, the group — led by Representative Mike Carey — called existing guidance “burdensome” and asked for a review before 2026.
Under prevailing interpretations, staking rewards are treated as taxable income when received, based on their market value at that time, and are then taxed again if sold at a gain.
Lawmakers argue this approach fails to reflect actual economic profit, particularly in volatile markets where token prices can fluctuate sharply between receipt and sale. “This letter is simply requesting fair tax treatment for digital assets,” Carey said, adding that taxing rewards only when sold would be a meaningful step toward clarity.
The renewed pressure highlights a broader debate over whether staking should be treated like earned income or more akin to unrealised asset appreciation — an issue that remains unresolved as staking becomes more central to proof-of-stake networks.
Separately, the Federal Reserve opened a consultation that could reshape how crypto and payment-focused firms interact with the US banking system.
The Fed is seeking public comment on a proposed “payment account,” a limited-use central bank account designed to sit alongside — but remain distinct from — the traditional master account used by banks.
The proposal shows growing strain on the Fed’s existing framework as fintechs and crypto firms seek direct access to payment rails without engaging in lending or deposit-taking.
By creating a tailored account model, the Fed appears to be weighing how to accommodate new business models while preserving safeguards tied to full-service banking.
The 45-day comment period, following publication in the Federal Register, suggests regulators are still in an exploratory phase. But even considering such accounts signals a recognition that denying access altogether may no longer be sustainable as digital payments and tokenised settlement systems expand.
While tax and banking debates focused on structural reform, enforcement remained firmly in play. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission charged a network of alleged fake crypto trading platforms and so-called AI investment clubs, accusing them of orchestrating a $14 million retail fraud.
According to the SEC, entities including Morocoin Tech Corp., Berge Blockchain Technology Co. Ltd., and several AI-branded investment clubs used social media advertising, messaging apps, and fabricated products to lure investors into what regulators described as an “investment confidence scam.”
The case shows persistent regulatory concern: while legitimate crypto firms push for clearer rules, bad actors continue to exploit hype around AI and digital assets to target retail investors. For regulators, enforcement actions like this remain a key justification for maintaining a hard line on consumer protection.
At the state level, Arizona lawmakers introduced a fresh attempt to carve out a more permissive tax environment for digital assets. Proposals backed by State Senator Wendy Rogers would exempt virtual currency from certain taxes and bar local governments from imposing fees on blockchain node operators.
One bill would remove virtual currency from state taxation, while another would prevent cities and counties from taxing node operations. A separate constitutional amendment would explicitly exclude crypto from property tax — but would require voter approval in November 2026.
The effort highlights the tension between state-level experimentation and broader fiscal realities. Arizona currently levies a flat 2.5% income tax and a transaction privilege tax that averages above 8.5% once local rates are included, making a fully “tax-free” status politically and fiscally complex.
This week’s developments illustrate a regulatory landscape in transition. Policymakers are increasingly focused on aligning crypto with existing financial principles — fair taxation, controlled access to payment systems, and investor protection — while still wrestling with how far existing rules can stretch.
As staking, tokenised payments, and crypto-native infrastructure mature, the pressure on regulators to move from interim fixes to durable frameworks is only set to grow.
