Senator Elizabeth Warren (D-MA) introduced an expanded coalition of Senate help this week for a bipartisan invoice to mitigate illicit finance dangers posed by cryptocurrencies.
5 extra senators have signed on because the invoice’s cosponsors, together with three members of the Senate Banking, Housing and City Affairs Committee — Senators Raphael Warnock (D-GA), Laphonza Butler (D-CA), and Chris Van Hollen of Maryland (D-MD). Senators John Hickenlooper (D-CO) and Ben Ray Luján (D-NM) additionally joined.
The Digital Asset Anti-Cash Laundering Act seeks to carry the crypto ecosystem into larger compliance with anti-money laundering frameworks governing the normal monetary system.
Based on the Treasury Division, digital belongings have more and more been used for cash laundering, ransomware assaults, theft schemes, terrorist financing, and different prison exercise. A White Home report final 12 months discovered that in 2021, illicit crypto transactions reached $20 billion globally – an all-time excessive.
The invoice
The bipartisan Digital Asset Anti-Cash Laundering Act goals to manage digital belongings like cryptocurrencies to fight illicit finance dangers. It will increase the definition of “monetary establishments” overseen for anti-money laundering compliance to incorporate cryptocurrency miners, {hardware} pockets suppliers, and impartial blockchain validators that facilitate digital asset transactions.
Inside 180 days, the Treasury Division should problem anti-money laundering rules for these newly coated entities. The invoice grants the Treasury the authority to require their registration with FinCEN. It additionally units a one-year deadline for FinCEN to finalize pending rules on transactions involving convertible digital currencies.
Moreover, the laws directs FinCEN to impose new reporting guidelines and transaction oversight measures associated to digital foreign money mixers and anonymity-enhanced cryptocurrencies usually used to obscure asset provenance. It duties the Treasury with crafting rules forcing monetary establishments to determine danger controls surrounding interactions with anonymizing digital asset applied sciences.
The invoice additionally outlines necessities for FinCEN, the Securities and Trade Fee, and the Commodity Futures Buying and selling Fee to develop specialised examination procedures assessing compliance with anti-money laundering guidelines amongst digital asset sector individuals.
The issue
If handed as written, the Digital Asset Anti-Cash Laundering Act may considerably impression Bitcoin. Designating Bitcoin miners, validators, and different community supporters as “monetary establishments” would mandate their compliance with anti-money laundering guidelines and monitoring of the Financial institution Secrecy Act. This locations new regulatory burdens and oversight on key gamers upholding the Bitcoin system. By straight focusing on “anonymity enhanced cryptocurrencies” and leveraging mixing providers to masks transactions, the invoice additionally threatens Bitcoin’s privateness attraction via prohibitions on interacting with instruments that protect person anonymity.
Moreover, expanded powers for the Monetary Crimes Enforcement Community over cryptocurrency exchanges could enhance scrutiny and regulation of entry/exit factors between Bitcoin and fiat cash. New reporting necessities may make Bitcoin transactions extra arduous. Some argue sweeping digital asset supporters like node operators and pockets suppliers into the expansive definition of monetary establishments could discourage participation in Bitcoin infrastructure. Diminished decentralization may then undermine community resilience.
In essence, whereas the invoice seeks to restrict illicit makes use of of cryptocurrencies via strict anti-money laundering insurance policies, imposed compliance challenges mixed with diminished privateness and decentralization could concurrently hinder benign Bitcoin development and adoption.
The bipartisan invoice displays rising strain to manage cryptocurrencies amid widening adoption. Further oversight goals to curb illicit makes use of whereas selling accountability throughout the business. But imposed rules additionally danger hampering technological progress, spurring intense debate amongst lawmakers and tech leaders.
