The crypto industry is backing down from a document that would outline a U.S. Senate Democratic pitch for managing decentralized finance (DeFi) as part of a broader effort to regulate crypto in the United States.
The proposal — a detailed overview outlining an approach to DeFi, first reported by Politico — suggests that a company or individuals that manage customer needs from the outset of a DeFi operation would need to register with the Securities and Exchange Commission or the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and be regulated as a broker-dealer.
The defining language who would be tied to regulation as an intermediary appears to include “everyone in crypto,” according to a take posted on the social media site X by Jake Chervinsky, Variant’s chief legal officer.
“Many aspects of the proposal are fundamentally broken and unworkable,” he argued. “This is not a ‘first offer’ in a negotiation; it is a list of demands that seem designed to kill the bill.”
Summer Mersinger, who heads the Blockchain Association and recently served as a CFTC commissioner, said the proposal “would effectively ban decentralized finance, wallet development and other applications in the United States.”
“The text as written is impossible to comply with and would promote responsible development abroad,” Mersinger said in a statement. “We urge our policymakers to stay at the table.”
Before Senate work on crypto market structure fell into the shadow of ongoing negotiations to reopen the federal government, Senate Republicans and Democrats were circling legislative language and appeared poised to make progress on a combined final bill. But the industry was bracing in August for an expected reaction from Democratic Sen. Mark Warner, a key lawmaker on national security issues who has raised concerns about illicit financing in crypto.
This latest proposal is apparently intended to allow the Treasury Department, market regulators, and the Federal Reserve to squeeze bad actors by allowing government agencies to identify those they can hold responsible for DeFi activity, loosely described as “any person who designs, deploys, operates, or profits from a DeFi interface.” However, he argues that pure DeFi protocols that do not make money can be defined as “decentralized enough” to be outside the regulatory perimeter.
The proposal also aims to free software developers from legal liability for their open source creations, provided they don’t make money exploiting the technology. This question of liability is among the main concerns in the DeFi space.
Meanwhile, lawmakers in the House of Representatives, where a market structure has already passed by a wide margin, called on the Senate to move forward and use its Digital Asset Market Clarity Act as a model instead of starting over.
However, Senate legislation relies more on bipartisan support to meet the usual 60-vote requirement. Although the crypto work has a long list of Democratic allies, they have made it clear that they are seeking a number of changes to previous Republican bills before they can join them.
Read more: A16z and DeFi Group Present Safe Harbor for DeFi Applications to US SEC
