DoTheySupportIt logoDoTheySupportIt
SenateHouseBillsRecent stancesFAQ
DoTheySupportIt logoDoTheySupportIt

Tracking where politicians stand on crypto, from what they say to how they vote. Made to help create more economic freedom.

Explore

  • Politicians
  • Senate
  • House
  • Bills
  • Recent stances

About

  • FAQs
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms and Conditions
  1. Home
  2. Crypto bills in Congress
  3. S.2669
S.2669118th Congress·Introduced 2023-07-27

Is The Bill "Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2023" Crypto Friendly?

Based on 1 published commentary, this bill is very anti-crypto.

Very Anti-Crypto
About this bill

This bill, titled the "Digital Asset Anti-Money Laundering Act of 2023," seeks to significantly expand the regulatory reach of the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network (FinCEN) over digital assets. It redefines "financial institution" to include unhosted wallet providers, digital asset miners, validators, and other network participants, subjecting them to Bank Secrecy Act obligations. The bill also mandates regulations on anonymity-enhanced cryptocurrencies and mixers, and imposes reporting requirements for digital assets held outside the U.S.

Official title: A bill to require the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network to issue guidance on digital assets, and for other purposes.

Introduced
2023-07-27
Status
Introduced and Sponsored
Legislature
118th Congress
Stance on Crypto
Very Anti-Crypto
From 1 published commentary

Scores reflect how a bill would affect crypto if enacted, from very anti-crypto to very pro-crypto, based on the commentary below.

Support in Congress
  • Sponsors1 Democrat1
  • Cosponsors16 Democrats · 1 Independent · 1 Republican18
Read the bill
Read on Congress.govView on GovTrack

Commentary

Add Commentary
Profile picture of DoTheySupportIt
DoTheySupportIt
Primary
marked this bill asVery Anti-Crypto

"The legislation would classify certain industry participants, including individual miners and validators, as financial institutions subject to the Bank Secrecy Act compliance regime. Treating these entities commensurate with the largest banks, hedge funds, and money transmitters would weigh them down with unnecessary compliance, stifle innovation, hinder industry growth, and force activity offshore to jurisdictions with less adequate security and oversight. 

For example, digital asset validators and miners do not typically engage in activities that qualify them as financial institutions under the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network’s (FinCEN) definition. FinCEN’s regulations are designed to cover entities that engage in traditional financial activities, such as accepting deposits, issuing loans, or engaging in other types of lending or financial intermediation. Digital asset validators and miners are generally involved in the technical operation of blockchain networks and do not provide financial services to customers. Blockchains are the software rails on which transactions, financial and otherwise, operate–but we do not subject software providers of banking infrastructure to the same regulations as banks.  

Registering as a financial institution would impose significant compliance costs and hinder or preclude participation in the digital asset ecosystem. Covered entities may be forced to depart the U.S., resulting in a brain drain of talented developers and technical experts critical to continued digital asset ecosystem development. This is already occurring: in 2017 the U.S. led all other nations with a 40% share of global blockchain developer roles; that share has dwindled to 29% today and is projected to decrease by an average of 2% annually–and in an industry expanding at a torrid pace, meaning we are holding a diminishing share of a growing pie. 

Instead of requiring digital asset validators and miners to register as financial institutions, regulators should focus on developing a regulatory framework that is tailored to digital assets’ unique characteristics and balances the imperative for consumer protection with the benefits of innovation and growth. "

Chamber of Digital Commerce

https://digitalchamber.org/statement-on-digital-asset-aml-act/

Where Congress stands

Every member who has sponsored, cosponsored or voted on this bill. Pick a vote to see how each member voted on it, or narrow by party, name or state.

Sponsors

1

1 Democrat

  • Profile picture of Elizabeth Warren
    Elizabeth Warren
    Senator · MA

Cosponsors

18

16 Democrats · 1 Independent · 1 Republican

Democrats16

  • Profile picture of Michael Bennet
    Michael Bennet
    Senator · CO
  • Profile picture of Richard Blumenthal
    Richard Blumenthal
    Senator · CT
  • Profile picture of Laphonza Butler
    Laphonza Butler
    Senator · CA
  • Profile picture of Bob Casey Jr.
    Bob Casey Jr.
    Senator · PA
  • Profile picture of Catherine Cortez Masto
    Catherine Cortez Masto
    Senator · NV
  • Profile picture of Dick Durbin
    Dick Durbin
    Senator · IL
  • Profile picture of John Fetterman
    John Fetterman
    Senator · PA
  • Profile picture of John Hickenlooper
    John Hickenlooper
    Senator · CO
  • Profile picture of Ben Ray Luján
    Ben Ray Luján
    Senator · NM
  • Profile picture of Joe Manchin III
    Joe Manchin III
    Senator · WV
  • Profile picture of Gary Peters
    Gary Peters
    Senator · MI
  • Profile picture of Jeanne Shaheen
    Jeanne Shaheen
    Senator · NH
  • Profile picture of Tina Smith
    Tina Smith
    Senator · MN
  • Profile picture of Chris Van Hollen
    Chris Van Hollen
    Senator · MD
  • Profile picture of Raphael Warnock
    Raphael Warnock
    Senator · GA
  • Profile picture of Sheldon Whitehouse
    Sheldon Whitehouse
    Senator · RI

Independent1

  • Profile picture of Angus King Jr.
    Angus King Jr.
    Senator · ME

Republican1

  • Profile picture of Lindsey Graham
    Lindsey Graham
    Senator · SC