News related to
digital

Israeli Finance Minister Bezalel Smotrich has ordered the cancellation of a decades‑long indemnity that shields Israeli banks when processing shekel transactions for Palestinian counterparts, a move poised to disrupt salaries, imports and basic services across the West Bank and Gaza.

The directive, issued on 10 June 2025, halts a waiver that permitted Israeli financial institutions to facilitate payments to the Palestinian Authority and local customers without fear of legal consequences. Analysts warn this could sever Palestinian banks’ vital access to the larger Israeli banking system.

Palestinian Monetary Authority officials cautioned that this severance would seriously impede operations such as payments for food, fuel, electricity and water. In 2023 alone, around 53 billion shekels—equivalent to $15.2 billion—passed through Palestinian banking corridors. The revocation of the indemnity risks plunging the territories into a fragile cash‑only system, heightening exposure to theft, fraud and illicit activity.

Smotrich’s decision follows sanctions by the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and Norway imposing asset freezes and travel bans on him and National Security Minister Itamar Ben‑Gvir, citing their roles in incitement and human rights abuses in the West Bank and Gaza. Smotrich maintains the waiver withdrawal is a justified response to what he terms the Palestinian Authority’s “delegitimisation campaign” against Israel.

For decades, Palestinian banking operated without central‑bank autonomy or national currency. Reliance on Israeli shekels and correspondent banking agreements has been critical. International voices—including US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, G7 officials and the UN—have repeatedly warned that ending this arrangement could trigger a humanitarian crisis and violate international law.

Local analysts predict the measures will exacerbate an already deteriorating economic landscape. Kristin Ronzi of intelligence firm Rane Network said abolishing this financial collaboration will “impede the Palestinian Authority’s ability to import basic, essential goods such as food and fuel,” likely deepening economic hardship and undermining public sentiment.

The Palestinian banking system, which exceeds 100 % of GDP, is particularly vulnerable to spill‑over effects from Gaza into the West Bank, according to IMF data. The termination of the waiver is feared to amplify credit constraints on private and public sectors alike, risking reduced lending, increased borrowing costs, and even defaults.

International stakeholders, including the US and G7, had pressed for short‑term extensions of the indemnity. Those appeals often hinged on warnings that a collapse of Palestinian financial networks would destabilise trade, delay crucial services, and potentially fuel militant groups reliant on cash economies.

Smotrich is known for his hardline positions: he has previously withheld Israeli-tax clearance revenues and blocked aid in retaliation for moves supportive of Palestinian statehood. In May 2025, he warned publicly that Gaza “will be totally destroyed,” vowing to push Palestinians toward resettlement in other countries.

Within Israel, there is evident friction. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and some coalition members support Smotrich, but others fear political and economic backlash—particularly amid international outrage and concern over deepening the Gaza violence. The policy must still pass through Israel’s security cabinet before implementation begins.

Across Palestinian chambers in Ramallah and Gaza City, there is growing anxiety. Authorities are scrambling to negotiate with donors, international NGOs and Middle Eastern allies, in hopes of constructing contingency plans. Proposed measures include alternative cash corridors, increased use of digital currencies, and humanitarian exemptions—but none currently matches the scale of the existing system.

Economists warn the broader consequences of this rupture—the Palestinian economy has already lost billions amid conflict. Since October 2023, Gaza’s economy shrank by 61 %, the West Bank by 24 %, and joblessness soared to around 57 % across both territories. Analysts fear the banking clamp‑down could invert years of fragile recovery efforts, worsening poverty and political instability.

The United States Supreme Court has been asked to reconsider constitutional protections after the Internal Revenue Service obtained transaction records from more than 14,000 cryptocurrency users—including James Harper—without a warrant, under a sweeping “John Doe” summons aimed at Coinbase data. At issue is whether the longstanding third‑party doctrine—under which individuals forfeit Fourth Amendment privacy protections by sharing data with third parties—remains valid in the digital age.

James Harper, whose trading history dates back to 2013 and who reported all taxable gains, received notification in August 2019 that the IRS had secured his wallet and transaction data without any suspicion of wrongdoing. The agency extended its data collection to approximately 14,000 other users, sparking legal challenges in lower courts and culminating in the Supreme Court petition known as Harper v. Faulkender.

Supporters of Harper argue that the third‑party doctrine originated in a pre‑digital era, designed for narrow investigations, not mass data collection. In briefs filed on 13 June, the New Civil Liberties Alliance and Supreme Court litigator Kannon Shanmugam contended that individuals do not relinquish property or privacy rights simply by using digital platforms, and that warrant requirements should be reinstated for data access. Justice Sonia Sotomayor, in previous commentary, branded the doctrine “ill‑suited to the digital age,” a view echoed by other federal judges in the Fifth and Ninth Circuits.

In contrast, the IRS and its supporters argue that the doctrine is well‑established and necessary for effective tax enforcement, especially amid growing use of cryptocurrencies and concerns over under‑reporting. The agency says organisations like Coinbase have an obligation to furnish information when legal summonses are issued, even absent individual suspicion.

Lower courts have upheld the doctrine, dismissing Harper’s case. A district court in New Hampshire ruled that Harper lacked standing, while the First Circuit applied the third‑party doctrine in September 2024 to dismiss his Fourth Amendment claim. Now, the Supreme Court must decide whether to reverse these rulings.

Analysts suggest that a Supreme Court hearing—and eventual decision—could set a transformative legal precedent regarding digital privacy. If justices mandate search warrants under the Fourth Amendment before agencies can collect personal data—even from third parties—it would broaden protections for online financial activity and reshape the investigative landscape. Conversely, a decision upholding the status quo would affirm broad government access to digital records without judicial oversight.

The case aligns with broader judicial scrutiny over the balance between technological advancement and constitutional safeguards. As cryptocurrency adoption increases among individuals and businesses, questions loom over how traditional investigative powers should adapt. Critics fear that unchecked authority under the third‑party doctrine could pave the way for routine surveillance and erosion of civil liberties.

At the same time, law enforcement officials maintain that revised legal thresholds could complicate investigations into financial crimes and tax fraud. They argue that agencies need efficient access to data held by third-party institutions to detect under‑reported crypto gains and illicit transactions swiftly.

The Supreme Court’s decision on certiorari is expected this autumn. Should the Court agree to hear the case, oral arguments may follow early next year, offering a watershed moment for Fourth Amendment jurisprudence. The outcome will be watched by constitutional scholars, digital‑rights activists, regulators and the cryptocurrency industry.

As digital transactions become integral to everyday life, the Harper v. Faulkender decision may redefine the boundary between individual privacy and government authority. The Court’s ruling could determine whether the act of sharing financial data with a platform like Coinbase is equivalent to voluntary disclosure, or if it remains protected under constitutional standards requiring judicial oversight.

Issuing its first formal financial move beyond social media, Truth Social’s parent, Trump Media & Technology Group, has filed an S‑1 registration statement with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission to launch a Bitcoin and Ethereum exchange‑traded fund under the Truth Social brand. The application outlines plans to list the fund on NYSE Arca, although ticker symbols and fee structures have yet to be disclosed.

NYSE Arca initiated the process on 3 June 2025 by submitting a Form 19b‑4 on behalf of TMTG and partner Yorkville America Digital, seeking approval to list the dual‑crypto ETF. The S‑1 filing followed on 5 June and provides deeper insights into structure and risk disclosures. The filings initiate the standard dual‑review process; the SEC has a 45‑day window for initial decision and up to 240 days for final approval.

The prospectus confirms that the fund will hold spot Bitcoin and Ethereum—the first dual‑crypto vehicle under the Truth Social banner. Physical custody of assets will be handled by Foris DAX Trust Company, affiliated with Crypto.com, which will also serve as execution agent and liquidity provider. Yorkville America Digital, a Florida‑based asset manager that emphasises “Made‑in‑America” digital‑asset products, is named as the sponsor.

Eric Balchunas, senior ETF analyst at Bloomberg Intelligence, noted the risk disclosures reference President Trump’s crypto‑favourable posture—highlighting regulatory shifts, the SEC’s newly launched crypto task force, and a strategic U.S. Bitcoin reserve executive order—marking the first time an ETF filing openly tied a sitting president’s actions to fund risk.

The launch is part of a broader the strategic pivot by Truth Social into financial services. Earlier this year, Trump Media announced a $2.5 billion Bitcoin treasury initiative and submitted trademark applications under its Truth.Fi brand for various crypto‑focused products. The move aligns with similar industry trends—11 spot Bitcoin ETFs have been approved since January 2024 by providers including BlackRock, Fidelity and Grayscale—a venue drawing billions in investor capital.

Yet the dual‑crypto ETF enters a saturated market, and analysts caution that without distinctive value, it may not draw substantial flows despite its political branding. Market watchers observe that assets under management in competing spot Bitcoin ETFs are heavily concentrated—with BlackRock’s IBIT holding approximately $69 billion, followed by Fidelity’s fund at around $21 billion.

The filings also highlight potential conflicts of interest. Yorkville America has financial ties with TMTG, including advising on Truth.Fi and investing in both the firm’s stock and private placement used to bolster the Bitcoin treasury. The application explicitly acknowledges these links may pose risks to investors.

Timing is politically significant, with the SEC’s current leadership under Paul Atkins perceived as taking a more crypto‑friendly stance. SEC deregulation efforts under President Trump’s administration also form part of the context.

Should the ETF be approved, it will enable investors to gain regulated exposure to Bitcoin and Ethereum—devoid of managing digital wallets or crypto‑exchange accounts—via traditional brokerage channels. The fund is poised to calculate daily net asset values, with intraday quotations updated every 15 seconds and comprehensive transparency on holdings, premiums and discounts.

However, regulatory clarity remains pending. Absent from the filings are critical operational details, including ticker symbols, expense ratios and seed capital levels. Until the S‑1 becomes effective, the ETF cannot be marketed to investors.

This marks a strategic landmark in Truth Social’s quest to diversify beyond digital media. Its expansion into crypto finance brings together political influence, regulatory momentum and mainstream investor demand, potentially reshaping its corporate identity. At stake is the fund’s ability to carve a credible and competitive space among established crypto‑ETF leaders.

Brazil has revoked its exemption for small-scale cryptocurrency gains, imposing a uniform 17.5% capital gains tax on all digital asset profits, effective from 12 June under Provisional Measure 1303. The measure replaces the previous tiered system—which allowed monthly tax-free crypto gains of up to R$35,000 and progressive rates of 15–22.5% for larger profits—and now applies to all holders, regardless of volume or wallet type.

The overhaul extends beyond exchange-traded assets to include self-custodied holdings and offshore crypto portfolios. Taxation occurs quarterly, with losses offsettable against gains over a rolling five-quarter period, although this allowance will narrow in 2026.

Smaller retail investors, previously shielded from taxes on modest gains, now face a significant shift. Under the old system, a casual trader earning R$30,000 in profits paid no tax; the new regime means a payable R$5,250—a leap from zero to 17.5%. Conversely, high-net-worth individuals stand to benefit: gains previously taxed at up to 22.5%—notably on trades above R$30 million—will now bear the lower flat rate.

This tax reform is part of a wider fiscal realignment aimed at broadening revenue sources. Previously untaxed fixed-income instruments like LCIs, LCAs, CRIs and CRAs are now subject to a 5% profit tax. Operators within online betting are also affected, with tax rates rising from 12% to 18%. The government had initially attempted to raise the IOF financial transaction tax, but withdrew following resistance.

The shift reflects Brazil’s position as Latin America’s largest crypto market, ranked among the world’s top ten in adoption. Government officials say the move is designed to simplify taxation, close loopholes—particularly for self-custody and offshore holdings—and treat crypto assets on par with traditional investments.

In March, Brazil’s Congress debated legislation to permit partial wage payments in Bitcoin, allowing up to 50% of salaries to be paid in crypto for domestic workers, and 100% for foreign contractors, under central bank supervision. While still under review, this bill indicates a dual approach: while levying stricter taxes, the state is also exploring broader integration of crypto into economic life.

Analysts suggest that while this latest policy may place increased pressure on small-scale traders, it could attract institutional investors seeking tax certainty. “Brazil now offers a clear, flat tax regime” for asset managers, said a financial strategist in São Paulo, referring to the capped 17.5% rate for large holdings.

Market observers caution, however, that the removal of tax-free gains may cool participation among casual investors, potentially reducing liquidity. With the reform’s full implementation and impact on compliance still unfolding, the crypto sector is bracing for a recalibration in trading dynamics.

Brazil is charting a potential first for any G20 economy by moving through its legislature a proposal to allocate up to 5 per cent of its approximately $370 billion foreign‑exchange reserves into Bitcoin. Bill PL 4501/2023, currently advanced by the Economic Development Committee, would establish a Sovereign Strategic Bitcoin Reserve—dubbed “RESBit”—under the joint oversight of the Central Bank and the Ministry of Finance, with stringent storage protocols and biannual audits.

The bill’s sponsor, Federal Deputy Eros Biondini, argues the measure would reinforce Brazil’s financial sovereignty and diversify its reserve holdings beyond traditional assets. Parliamentarian Luis Gastão, acting as rapporteur, emphasises a cautious, phased implementation aimed at managing volatility exposure while boosting institutional resilience. This contrasts with El Salvador’s executive decree model; the Brazilian plan proceeds through parliamentary channels, potentially setting a more enduring legal precedent.

Storage and transparency are at the core of the proposal: BTC holdings would be secured via cold wallets, underpinned by mandated audits every six months, and reported directly to Congress. Advocates hope this methodical governance framework will ease institutional apprehensions while allowing crypto assets to form part of state‑backed fiscal strategy.

Market reaction has been swift. Analysts highlight the timing, noting that Bitcoin trades near $107,500, with a market capitalisation exceeding $2.1 trillion and a 30 percent rise over 90 days. Within Latin America, Brazil would stand alongside El Salvador as a pioneer, but its parliamentary route marks a significant departure, offering a scalable model potentially attractive to larger economies.

Experts say integration of Bitcoin into sovereign reserves could unlock strategic advantages. Proponents highlight potential hedging against inflation and dollar dependency, while warning of crypto’s inherent risk. Central Bank and finance ministry coordination could foster system-level stability, aligning with policy objectives such as the issuance of a central bank digital currency.

A global ripple effect may follow. Brazil’s initiative has garnered attention across financial and crypto communities; social‑media commentators suggest it may herald the second phase of sovereign Bitcoin adoption, one grounded in legislative legitimacy rather than executive fiat.

Opposition voices within the finance sector remain vigilant. Critics question Bitcoin’s volatility and liquidity as state assets, urging robust risk frameworks before proceeding. Analysts stress the need for comprehensive impact assessments, including stress‑testing against currency and gold reserves.

The Ethereum Foundation has pledged a significant $500,000 to support the legal defence of Roman Storm, co-founder of Tornado Cash, a cryptocurrency privacy mixer under legal scrutiny. The funds are designated for Storm’s upcoming trial in the United States, where he faces charges related to facilitating money laundering.

EF maintains that Storm’s actions—creating computer code to enable financial privacy—should not be criminalised. According to their position, penalising code that protects user privacy sets a dangerous legal precedent, potentially criminalising open-source software development.

Complementing its own contribution, the Eastern blockchain non‑profit has also committed to matching up to $750,000 in community donations. This initiative highlights a growing trend among privacy advocates and open‑source groups rallying behind the principle that privacy-preserving tools like Tornado Cash are legitimate forms of expression.

Storm was sanctioned by the US Office of Foreign Assets Control in 2022 following accusations of facilitating transactions for illicit actors. Prosecutors allege that he developed and operated the protocol despite knowing it could be used for crime. EF’s funding underscores a global debate over the legality of cryptographic tools and the boundary between code development and criminal liability.

Legal scholars warn that punishing software developers for downstream misuse of their code risks criminalising a broad array of programmers. EF counsel Mark Richardson stated that the Foundation views the case as emblematic: “Drawing a line at coding privacy tools criminalises essential computer science.”

Meanwhile, Storm’s defence team asserts he has complied with all legal sanctions since 2022 and is legally entitled to defend himself. His lawyers argue that code is not money, and that the US charges threaten basic digital rights globally.

The donation has triggered mixed reactions across the crypto ecosystem. Privacy-focused developers and activists have welcomed the move, viewing it as a bulwark against overreach. Others caution that aligning with a figure sanctioned for money-laundering may tarnish the reputations of supportive institutions.

Industry analysis shows similar defence funds are emerging. After Tornado Cash co-founder Alexey Pertsev was indicted in 2023, a contingent of blockchain attorneys and developers established a legal support fund that raised over $1 million. That effort helped secure pro bono counsel and led to a plea deal later that year, avoiding jail time.

This pattern reflects an emerging ecosystem of legal defence organisations in crypto. Legal incubators like the Blockchain Advocacy Group are also gaining prominence. Their efforts underscore how the infrastructure behind open‑source development is evolving—from purely technical endeavours to encompassing legal and policy support.

Globally, courts are increasingly confronting the tension between code as speech and legal responsibility for misuse. In the US, landmark cases such as Bernstein v. US DOJ recognised source code as protected expression under the First Amendment. However, the legal landscape remains uncertain as more privacy tools face legal action.

Ethereum’s own legacy in decentralisation and censorship-resistance makes this move philosophically consistent. Other projects, including Monero and Zcash, have similarly supported neutral stances on privacy technologies while discouraging illicit misuse. Some funders in the Ethereum ecosystem have previously financed legal defences for developers under regulatory pressure.

Legal experts caution that outcomes in Storm’s trial could have far-reaching implications. If the prosecution succeeds, it may embolden regulators to pursue software developers in other jurisdictions—potentially chilling innovation in cryptography and privacy tools.

EF’s donation also coincides with debates in Europe and the US over privacy regulation. In the EU, digital privacy laws are being reformed; shielding cryptographic tools may soon gain legislative clarity. In the US, government task forces are evaluating whether sanctions should extend to software developers whose code is used unlawfully.

Public reaction has been vocal. Twitter and Telegram forums dedicated to crypto privacy have confirmed that EF’s announcement prompted a surge in community donations. Some analysts estimate over $200,000 has been raised within just 24 hours of the announcement.

Major corporations Walmart and Amazon are understood to be mulling the launch of their own stablecoins as part of a broader trend among retailers and tech companies seeking to streamline payment systems and reduce transaction costs. With the U.S. Congress advancing the GENIUS Act—legislation to regulate stablecoin issuance—the moment now appears opportune for these private-sector experiments.

Both Walmart and Amazon are reportedly evaluating the regulatory environment and potential use cases for proprietary stablecoins. Sources suggest these could be integrated with payment platforms, loyalty schemes and digital marketplaces. Such a move would allow these companies to bypass conventional card rails and intermediaries that currently levy high fees on merchants and slow settlement times.

Walmart’s ongoing fintech ambitions align with the exploration of stablecoin applications. The retailer has already lobbied for regulatory changes aimed at bringing greater competition into credit card networks, indicating a broader shift towards alternative payment mechanisms. Amazon, though in the preliminary assessment stage, is also understood to be considering whether a branded stablecoin might enhance the convenience of online transactions.

The GENIUS Act currently under Senate review is central to this evolution. It delineates a framework for “permitted payment stablecoin issuers” and mandates reserve requirements, redemption rules and federal oversight. While enabling banks, non-banks and subsidiaries to issue stablecoins, it permits notable flexibility across different sectors.

Critics are already voicing concerns. Legislators such as Senator Elizabeth Warren and Rep. Maxine Waters caution against allowing large non-financial firms to enter the payments landscape, fearing an erosion of banking safeguards and potential intensified corporate dominance. Academic voices, including law professor Hilary Allen, warn that Big Tech’s entry into finance could “entrench corporate power” and compromise consumer data privacy.

A key sticking point lies in a proposed amendment to prohibit non-financial corporations from issuing stablecoins unless they meet stringent criteria around financial stability, data protection and consumer welfare. This amendment would cover tech behemoths like Amazon, Meta and Apple. In contrast, proponents argue that allowing these companies in could foster innovation and enhance market competition.

Merchant industries are lobbying hard for clarity. The Merchants Payments Coalition argues that a stablecoin framework could disrupt the dominance of established payment networks and deliver substantial cost savings. Stakeholders have highlighted how cross-border payments could benefit from low-cost, near-instant settlement, echoing the broader fintech industry’s embrace of stablecoins as programmable rails for digital commerce.

Opposition remains robust, however. Critics warn that unbridled stablecoin issuance by non-financial corporations could introduce systemic risks. The GENIUS Act’s provisions are aimed at managing these risks through requirements for reserves, transparency, anti-money laundering compliance and state-federal coordination. Still, there is unease that enforcement mechanisms may not sufficiently address deep-seated concerns over financial stability and consumer safety.

Proponents believe stablecoins could transform how commerce operates, by speeding up settlements, reducing fees and enabling more fluid integration across digital platforms. With adoption driven by both large merchants and smaller enterprises, the innovation rather than consolidation of money systems could mark a significant shift.

Walmart and Amazon appear poised to test these boundaries. As the GENIUS Act moves closer to a Senate floor vote, the exact role that private-sector stablecoins will play remains uncertain. The decision by Congress to permit non-bank issuers is a strategic pivot, opening regulatory pathways that could redefine how money flows through the global payments ecosystem.

Sharjah Publishing City Free Zone has been awarded the globally recognised “Great Place to Work” certification for the second year running, underscoring its commitment to cultivating a top-tier workplace. The accolade, granted by an independent authority with over three decades of experience in measuring workplace culture, reflects outstanding performance across key employee experience metrics.

Employees gave the organisation exceptionally high ratings, with 94 per cent satisfaction in workplace hospitality, 90 per cent approval of leadership behaviour, 87 per cent for engagement and 86 per cent in innovation. Equity and fairness also scored strongly—over 70 per cent in relevant categories. A remarkable 99 per cent of staff reported feeling physically safe at work and welcomed upon arrival, while 96 per cent noted unbiased, gender-neutral treatment and approachable management. These figures speak to a supportive environment where employees feel secure, valued and motivated.

Behind these high scores lies a deliberate strategy focused on trust-building, transparent leadership and collaborative culture. Through the Great Place to Work® Trust Model™, SPC’s approach places employees as the cornerstone of its service delivery model. The environment it fosters not only benefits staff morale but also translates into superior customer experience, reflected in prompt and efficient services.

The achievement is particularly notable given the scale of SPC’s operations. The free zone hosts more than 9,600 businesses spanning over 40 countries, including more than 1,500 publishers and investors, and is a vital hub for educational and cultural content creation. Its ecosystem supports not only publishing but also broader creative, technological and entrepreneurial sectors.

SPC’s origins date back to its launch in 2017 under the guidance of Dr Sheikh Sultan bin Muhammed Al Qasimi, Ruler of Sharjah, as the world’s first dedicated publishing free zone. From the outset, it was positioned to capitalise on Sharjah’s increasing appeal as a global cultural and knowledge-based economy, offering 100 per cent foreign ownership, full capital repatriation and a broad spectrum of licensing activities.

Since its establishment, SPC has continuously upgraded both its work environment and customer services. In May 2024, it introduced 24/7 operational support and guaranteed a three-business-day turnaround for bank account openings. It also pioneered an AI-enabled “instant licence” system in collaboration with Sharjah’s Investor Services Centre, delivering trade licences in under five minutes. These initiatives demonstrate its dedication to efficiency and tech-enabled service delivery.

The free zone’s appeal stretches well beyond the publishing community. Over 2,000 Indian-owned businesses operate in SPC, drawn by its strategic location and integrated support infrastructure. These enterprises benefit from a platform that promotes global expansion and cross-border reach. SPC has also diversified licensing options to include e‑commerce, cybersecurity, AI, biotech and robotics, reflecting its ambition to cater for a wide range of creative and technological ventures.

Yet SPC has not been without critique. Some business owners on public forums have expressed frustration over service quality and administrative delays during setup. One Reddit user described licences issued “once you get the hang of things” albeit noting initial frustrations, while another labelled the free zone as “incredibly frustrating to deal with” but acknowledged smooth operation post-launch. These mixed reviews highlight areas for SPC to improve consistency in customer experience and operational support.

Despite these occasional criticisms, SPC remains a top choice for entrepreneurs and SMEs. An MoU with Amazon UAE in August 2024 aims to aid free zone businesses in scaling digitally and accessing Amazon’s e‑commerce network. Additionally, partnerships with financial institutions like Mashreq Bank provide priority banking services and support to its licensees.

The second consecutive Great Place to Work certification confirms SPC’s rising profile within Sharjah’s broader economic ecosystem. It aligns with Sharjah’s strategy to diversify its economy through nurturing creative, cultural and knowledge-based industries. Leadership at SPC points to this workplace accolade as affirming its role in attracting and retaining talent, as well as driving innovation in service delivery.

U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission chair Paul Atkins has formally withdrawn several cryptocurrency-focused rule proposals initiated under former chair Gary Gensler, representing a decisive shift in regulatory strategy.

At the centre of the SEC’s action are two major proposals: amendments to Exchange Act Rule 3b‑16, which sought to classify decentralized finance protocols as securities exchanges, and the implementation of enhanced custody requirements under the Investment Advisers Act for client crypto assets. The withdrawal, confirmed on 13 June 2025, reflects a broader deregulatory drive under the current administration.

Rule 3b‑16 had been poised to expand the SEC’s definition of “exchange” to include systems bringing together buyers and sellers of securities via smart contracts and other DeFi mechanisms. The proposal would have subjected many decentralised platforms to full regulatory oversight, unsettling industry participants and drawing criticism from blockchain developers and legal experts. Many in the crypto sector argued the move would permanently conflate DeFi infrastructure with traditional securities exchanges, hampering innovation.

The custody rule aimed to require investment advisers to deposit all client crypto assets with “qualified custodians” such as banks or registered broker‑dealers. That would have effectively sidelined many crypto-native custodians that don’t meet these standards. Proponents cited the need for robust safeguards, while opponents warned the rule would force clients into a narrow pool of custodians and increase costs.

The SEC’s withdrawal announcement emphasised that it will not pursue finalisation of these proposals and may “consider new rulemaking in the future.” The reversals are part of a broader retreat from Gensler-era initiatives, including planned ESG reporting mandates and cybersecurity obligations. Acting chair Mark Uyeda had suspended both the DeFi exchange and custody rules in March, and this withdrawal gives that decision official effect.

Market reaction was swift. Coinbase’s chief legal officer, Paul Grewal, declared on X that the agency had scrapped “3b16, qualified custodian, and all other unfinished Gensler rule proposals.” Crypto platforms welcomed the rollback, viewing it as a reaffirmation of self‑custody and decentralised financial innovation.

Institutional stakeholders also voiced support. Brian Laverdure, Senior VP of Digital Assets and Innovation Policy at ICBA, noted the agency’s publication had “withdraws several NPRMs” including definition of “exchange” changes and safeguarding rules, sending confidence ripples through community banks and investment advisers.

The shift in posture follows President Donald Trump’s commitment to reducing regulatory burdens on markets. In tandem, SEC staff and FINRA dismantled a long-standing 2019 joint statement on broker‑dealer custody of digital asset securities on 15 May, paving the way for regulated intermediaries to offer crypto custody services under established rules.

The SEC’s deregulatory drive is echoed in recent comments from Uyeda, who in March announced the agency might scrap or significantly amend crypto custody rules introduced during the previous administration. He emphasised a pivot towards “effective and cost‑efficient regulations that respect the limits of our statutory authority”.

Critics caution that this pivot could expose clients to risks. While standards for DeFi governance, custodial integrity, and cybersecurity remain under voluntary frameworks, there are concerns that stripping formal oversight could open institutional and retail investors to vulnerabilities. Legal analysts predict renewed debate over the SEC’s authority to classify new financial structures as securities.

DeFi proponents, for their part, argue the withdrawal presents an opportunity. With regulatory certainty withdrawn, startups and developers may double down on innovation, integrating hybrid compliance models that rely on decentralised autonomy rather than central oversight. Meanwhile, traditional custodians and broker‑dealers are expected to enter the crypto space more aggressively, now freed from the obligation of specialist “qualified custodian” status.

Remaining questions include whether Congress will move to impose legislative frameworks on digital assets and whether the SEC will pursue fresh proposals under a different legal theory. Commissioner Hester Peirce has signalled support for further dialogue and interpretative guidance, reinforcing a more incremental, consultative regulatory model.

The SEC is now scheduled to hold stakeholder forums and public consultations in the coming months. Industry watchers are closely tracking these developments to assess whether the rollback represents a long-term deregulatory reorientation or a temporary reprieve preceding fresh oversight efforts.