Coinbase and Robinhood won the crypto. Is it a policy or a policy?

The regulatory landscape of digital assets in the United States moves at an unprecedented speed, and it is impossible to ignore the political nuances that lead these changes. In a few weeks following the return of President Trump, Coinbase announced on Friday that the Securities and Exchange Commission abandoned his trial in 2023 against the cabinet, while Robinhood Crypto revealed on Monday that the SEC investigation in his activities was closed without action in application.

Although the dry itself did not make a public declaration confirming these decisions, the announcements of the companies sent shock waves in the form of a relief long awaited by the industry, signaling a spectacular reversal of the Heavy approach to Biden administration and cryptographic anti-rhetoric by the main leaders of Congress and Agencies. This occurs in the middle of broader structural changes, including the formation of a new crypto working group within the dry and the appointment of a pro-Crypto leadership, all aligning with the promise of the campaign of Trump to make America the “world capital of cryptography”.

But beyond regulatory relief, what we are witnessing is the most important return on investment in the cryptography industry in the reshaping of Washington’s power dynamics. With more than $ 110 million in political contributions and almost half of all companies’ money during the 2024 electoral cycle from cryptographic companies, according to a Citizen public report, the industry now collects the awards of ‘Strategic political alignment.

Regulatory relief or political favoritism?

The past application approach of the SEC – in particular under the former president Gary Gensler – was defined by the dispute and the aggressive interpretation of the securities laws. The agency brought prosecution against Coinbase, Binance, Kraken and Robinhood, arguing that these companies offered unregistered titles and violated federal laws. Cryptographic industry has long criticized this approach as regulation by application, stifling innovation and pushing businesses abroad.

Now, with the cases of Coinbase and Robinhood apparently resolved, the question is whether this change represents a long expected correction for regulatory surpassing or strategic political favor to an industry which has invested massively in the remodeling of the position of the government on crypto.

Timing is impossible to ignore. The Coinbase announcement of the DEC-law dismissal intervened just a few days after the company revealed the appointment of Chris Lacivita, the former Camp Director of Trump, to his global advisory council. This raises crucial questions:

• Do the direct Coinbase links with the inner circle of Trump gets a favorable regulatory result?
• Should companies that manage to align themselves with the administration should be excessive to a meticulous examination?
• Is the regulation of cryptography now dictated by political loyalty rather than by legal and financial surveillance?

Regulation policy and policy

Unlike the cabinet positions, which are used for the pleasure of the president, agencies like the dry are independent by design, which means that their leadership is not supposed to change with each administration. SEC commissioners serve five -year -old mandates and can only be removed due. However, the past few weeks have shown to what extent regulatory independence can be influenced by political appointments, policy inversions and internal restructuring.

Under the administration of Trump, the dry already:

• Canceled previous advice related to crypto, including the accounting rules of staff that have made more difficult for companies to engage in banking services.
• The leadership stacked with pro-Crypto voices, including the expected appointment of Paul Atkins, a long-standing critic of the approach to apply the SEC, as the following president.
• Created a dedicated crypto working group, led by Commissioner Hester Peirce (nicknamed “Crypto Mom”), to write regulations adapted to industry.

If cryptographic companies can bypass years of disputes simply by changing political alliances, what does this mean for regulatory certainty, justice and integrity of independent agencies?

100 million dollars of Power Washington

The financial contributions of the cryptographic industry in the 2024 electoral cycle have exceeded all other sector, with almost half of all business donations from Crypto companies. This investment was not part of the campaign contributions. It was a question of obtaining a political influence at the highest levels of government.

Consequently, more than 250 pro-Crypto candidates were elected at Congress, alongside 16 Pro-Crypto senators. The dry about the front is not only a change in regulation. It is a clear signal that the political investment of the industry is bearing fruit. And although the regulatory change of the SEC dominates the headlines, the congress also moves quickly to reshape the legal framework for digital assets. One of the main priorities is the regulation of stablescoin, with competing bills in both the Chamber and the Senate.

The overview of the cryptography industry

With the administration of Trump which evolves aggressively to reshape the policy of digital assets, the key question is whether these fast and furious changes lead to a long -term transparent regulatory framework to prosper during all seasons. Or if they will create a precedent where the regulatory clarity is transactional, moving with political power?

If the cryptography industry finds only regulatory help under republican leaders, this may further politicize financial regulations, leading to uncertainty to each electoral cycle.

For democrats, this moment presents a challenge: to ignore the crypto and lose the loss of influence on one of the financial sectors which knows the fastest growth. Or undertake to develop a bipartite framework that gives clarity, opportunities and protection without giving up the story or stifling innovation in the United States.

For cryptographic companies, the lesson is clear: the rules of the game have changed, but they remain deeply political. However, regulatory certainty is still uncertain unless it is built on bipartite legal foundations rather than political maneuvers. Long -term stability depends on the guarantee of the congress (with its judicial and surveillance powers prescribed by the Constitution), not only the White House, leads to the policy of digital assets.

Long -term stability or short -term strategy?

The reported retirement of the dry on Coinbase and Robinhood marks a decisive moment in the evolution of the regulation of cryptography. But if this change represents a step towards sustainable clarity or a dangerous precedent of regulatory favoritism remains to be seen.

With the Congress which pushes new legislation, the White House aligning with industry players and Crypto companies who bow deep in political strategy, the next four years will shape the long -term trajectory of digital assets in the United States

Is it the dawn of a stable and transparent regulatory era for the crypto? Or is the industry simply the last actor in the power of the political game with high Washington stakes?