Crypto Lobby Warns Senate Bill Could Criminalize Developers, Risking U.S. Exodus
Coin Center and other crypto advocates warned the Senate that revisions to the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act (BRCA) could blur the legal line between software development and money transmission, exposing non‑custodial developers and infrastructure providers to money‑transmitter liability. Senators Cynthia Lummis and Ron Wyden proposed updated language intended to clarify that developers who write code or run infrastructure but do not control user funds should not be treated as money transmitters. The debate intensified after high‑profile prosecutions—most notably the Tornado Cash developer and Samourai Wallet affiliates—resulted in convictions for operating an unlicensed money‑transmitting business, creating precedent that advocates say risks criminalizing tooling authors and open‑source contributors. Coin Center policy director Jason Somensatto likened blockchain developers to ISPs and cloud hosts, urging retention of safe‑harbor language to avoid chilling innovation and driving projects and talent offshore. The BRCA has not yet been marked up in the Senate Banking Committee; lawmakers must balance public‑safety and anti‑money‑laundering concerns with preserving legal certainty for onshore crypto development. For traders: potential outcomes include increased regulatory uncertainty that could weigh on U.S.‑listed crypto firms and onshore developer activity, a legal environment that may favor offshore platforms, and heightened compliance and operational risk for infrastructure projects that could affect market sentiment.
Neutral
The news is primarily regulatory and legal, increasing policy uncertainty rather than directly affecting a single token’s protocol or tokenomics. For traders this registers as neutral overall: it does not introduce a protocol-level technical risk to any specific cryptocurrency, but it raises jurisdictional and operational risks for U.S.-based developers, infrastructure providers and firms. Short term, heightened regulatory uncertainty can depress sentiment for U.S.-listed crypto companies and infrastructure tokens tied to centralized service providers, potentially causing modest downside pressure. Volatility may increase around legislative milestones or high-profile prosecutions. Long term, if protections are removed and developers relocate offshore, U.S. innovation and onshore liquidity could weaken, which may marginally dampen adoption and enterprise activity tied to U.S. markets. Conversely, clear safe harbors would be positive for onshore developer activity and institutional participation. Given these offsetting effects and absence of an immediate market-moving technical event, the balanced assignment is neutral.