On February 28, U.S. lawmakers from both parties jointly introduced the “Promoting Innovation in Blockchain Development Act” on February 26, aiming to clarify the legal responsibilities of blockchain developers and prevent open-source code authors from being mistakenly classified as remittance institutions. The proposal, led by Scott Fitzgerald, Ben Cline, and Zoe Lofgren, focuses on amending Section 1960 of the U.S. Code to target custodians who control customer assets or execute transfers on behalf of users.
The bill suggests that, amid rising debates over whether “open-source software developers should bear remittance licensing responsibilities” and “legal risks for non-custodial blockchain developers,” clear exemptions should be provided for entities that only write or distribute code. The ongoing lawsuits related to Tornado Cash have further amplified industry concerns about “code as crime.” Ben Cline noted that long-term regulatory expansion blurs the line between malicious actors and technological innovators; Scott Fitzgerald also emphasized that innovators should not face undue law enforcement pressure for developing infrastructure.
Industry support has come from the Solana Institute and the Blockchain Association, which believe the bill will help establish a clear framework distinguishing “open-source developers from custodial financial intermediaries.” Meanwhile, discussions in Washington also include topics like the CLARITY Act and the GENIUS Act. The former, passed by the House in 2025 but with slowed progress, aims to clarify regulations, while the latter enhances stablecoin oversight without expanding developer responsibilities.
Analysts believe that if enacted, the “Promoting Innovation in Blockchain Development Act” will set a precedent for reshaping the U.S. crypto regulatory framework and defining blockchain developers’ compliance boundaries. Ongoing lobbying efforts continue, and the specific wording and scope of the Section 1960 amendments could be a key factor influencing U.S. crypto policy in 2026.
Disclaimer: The information on this page may come from third parties and does not represent the views or opinions of Gate. The content displayed on this page is for reference only and does not constitute any financial, investment, or legal advice. Gate does not guarantee the accuracy or completeness of the information and shall not be liable for any losses arising from the use of this information. Virtual asset investments carry high risks and are subject to significant price volatility. You may lose all of your invested principal. Please fully understand the relevant risks and make prudent decisions based on your own financial situation and risk tolerance. For details, please refer to
Disclaimer.
Related Articles
Crypto Reporter: US Judges Show Divergent Attitudes Toward DeFi Developers, "Neutral Infrastructure" Could Become a Key Criterion
On March 10th, crypto journalist Eleanor Terrett pointed out that U.S. Judge Failla showed a different attitude when presiding over cases involving Tornado Cash and Uniswap developers, considering Uniswap as neutral infrastructure, while viewing Tornado Cash as involved in illegal financial activities, which could influence the future liability determination for DeFi project developers.
GateNews34m ago
A key step in US stablecoin regulation: OCC releases the first regulatory framework for payment stablecoin issuance
The Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has released a federal rule proposal for payment stablecoin issuers to establish a unified regulatory framework for the stablecoin market. The draft restricts issuers from paying interest to holders, requires transparent reserve management, and sets capital requirements. This move marks the concretization of the U.S. stablecoin regulatory system, aiming to ensure compliance and industry stability.
GateNews1h ago
South Korean court plans to exempt cryptocurrency investment debts: New bankruptcy restructuring regulations may change how individual crypto losses are handled
The Korean judicial system is reducing the debt burden of cryptocurrency investors through bankruptcy restructuring mechanisms, excluding some debts from liquidation, which may lead to cryptocurrency asset investment losses being considered as "ordinary property losses." This policy aims to address rising household debt levels but has also sparked controversy over moral hazard. The courts will strengthen review processes to prevent abuse and explore a balance between debt relief and risk control.
GateNews1h ago
New Developments in China's Cryptocurrency Regulation: Stablecoins and RWA Highlighted for the First Time, the US Dollar Digital System Could Become the Biggest Variable
China strengthens its regulatory policies on cryptocurrencies, reaffirming a comprehensive ban on RMB-pegged stablecoins and classifying most RWA tokenization activities as illegal. The market response is muted, indicating that investors have adapted to this change. The policy's first mention of stablecoins may signal future regulatory reforms, but implementation will still take time. Global digital asset trading could develop into a USD-denominated system, with liquidity being a key factor. Future regulatory frameworks will influence the global market landscape.
GateNews1h ago
Jason Atkins: China's RWA ban signals market direction; the dollarization trend of stablecoins cannot be stopped
China issues a ban on unauthorized Renminbi-pegged stablecoins and considers RWA tokenization activities illegal, aiming to prevent industry expansion. Analysts believe that this ban cannot stop the global demand for USD stablecoins, and Hong Kong's stablecoin licensing may also present opportunities for Chinese-funded banks, indicating a subtle regulatory adjustment. Overall, China's measures are targeted at the domestic market rather than an obstacle to global RWA development.
MarketWhisper2h ago
China's Supreme Court drafts judicial documents clarifying copyright recognition rules for AI-generated works, with related cases increasing by 25.6% annually
The Supreme People's Court of China is drafting policy documents regarding legal issues related to AI-generated works copyright and large model training, clarifying rules for originality recognition and the responsibilities of service providers. Taking the "Ultraman case" as an example, the court ruled that the AI platform must cease infringement and bear responsibility.
GateNews3h ago
