The cryptocurrency industry is turning a new page in the new year. And this new leaf comes with new laws.
Starting January 1, 2026, Americans should be eligible for crypto refunds at Colorado ATMs; while in New York, digital asset-focused Section 12 and other 2022 amendments to the Uniform Commercial Code (UCC) will have been signed into law. Nationally in the United States, the Federal Reserve used the final weeks of 2025 to rescind several banking policy statements on “new activities” related to blockchain and digital assets.
And around the world, PYMNTS detailed how a January 1 report reveals that tax authorities around the world are moving closer to crypto tax avoidance by requiring exchanges to begin collecting and reporting detailed trading records for local customers in the UK and more than 40 other countries.
Tax news in particular is less about revenue collection and more about legitimacy. An asset class that cannot be reliably taxed cannot be fully integrated into national economies. By requiring exchanges to take reporting responsibilities, governments are moving cryptocurrency from a self-managed ecosystem to one integrated into public financial infrastructure.
Overall, the start of the new year shows that crypto companies and their regulators are prioritizing compliance over the industry’s Wild West pace of disruption and innovation.
While the early talk of cryptocurrency was about disintermediation and escapism from traditional finance, its emerging reality is about integration and accountability. The laws and enforcement actions that will shape 2026 will not mark the end of crypto’s disruptive potential. They mark the end of his regulatory adolescence.
Advertisement: Scroll to continue
What happens next will be less about crypto’s ability to grow and more about what kind of adult it chooses to become.
Learn more: Stablecoins became useful in 2025, can they become ubiquitous in 2026?
Crypto’s regulatory adolescence is over
The initial growth of the crypto industry depended in part on regulatory ambiguity. Entrepreneurs could act quickly, investors could speculate freely, and users could experiment without the many guardrails that define traditional finance. This environment has produced extraordinary innovation, but also spectacular failures, from the collapse of exchanges and the delisting of stablecoins to frauds that have cost individual users billions of dollars.
For crypto businesses, the operational implications of the increasing focus on compliance are significant. Compliance teams must evolve. Data systems must mature. Jurisdictional differences should be approached with caution. The cost of doing business will increase, especially for smaller players. But so will barriers to entry, which could ultimately reduce the prevalence of illegal operators who have long tarnished the industry’s reputation.
This recalibration is especially important when compared to the application statistics that defined 2025.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), for example, has initiated more than 30 crypto-related enforcement actions, resulting in $2.6 billion in penalties and disgorgements, the highest total ever in the industry.
The CFTC figures were even more striking. Digital asset cases made up nearly half of its enforcement docket, generating more than $17 billion in monetary relief. These numbers have fueled headlines about regulatory crackdowns, but the underlying trend tells a more nuanced story.
From the perspective of compliant cryptocurrency companies, the year’s numerous enforcement actions and criminal cases reflect the SEC and CFTC’s increasing focus on fraud and crime, rather than debates over whether digital assets deserve security or commodity designations.
In doing so, the agencies are sending a clear message that while they hope to bring greater regulatory clarity to the crypto sector, they will continue to target bad actors who prey on investors.
Learn more: Crypto loses hype but wins banks
How the Crypto Industry is Embracing Compliance
The common thread running through these regulatory changes is not hostility toward cryptocurrencies, but impatience with their immaturity.
In its adolescence, the industry often claimed that regulation would stifle innovation. Sometimes it was true. More often than not, it was an excuse to avoid difficult questions about consumer protection, systemic risk and liability. The result was a boom-and-bust cycle that enriched some, burned many, and left policymakers scrambling to respond after the fact.
Today we are witnessing a shift from reactive regulation to structural governance. Instead of banning activities outright, regulators set the rules of the road. Instead of treating crypto as an anomaly, they integrate it into existing legal and financial frameworks, modifying those frameworks as necessary.
The most significant changes in economic systems often occur not through grand declarations, but through incremental alignment. Commercial law updates. Consumer protection rules. Tax reporting standards. Guidance on banking supervision. It is these levers that determine whether an industry remains marginal or becomes fundamental.
After all, disruption does not equal disorder. The Internet did not lose its transformative power when telecommunications laws, privacy rules, and consumer protections caught up with it. On the contrary, these safeguards have enabled broader adoption and more sustainable business models. Crypto could enter a similar phase.
