Category: TDC Update

Myth vs. Fact: Common Misconceptions About the CLARITY Act

by Neil Humphrey

The CLARITY Act has sparked a lot of debate, including concerns that it could shield bad actors, strip the SEC of authority, or pressure banks into adopting blockchain–based technologies. But a closer look tells a different story: the bill is focused on defining regulatory jurisdiction, extending Bank Secrecy Act oversight to digital assets, strengthening consumer protections, and more. We broke down 10 of the biggest myths to help separate facts from fiction. 

Myth #1: The bill undermines law enforcement by inadequately addressing illicit finance and national security risks. 
Fact: In modern finance, the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA) misses the mark to regulate digital assets. The CLARITY Act is needed to fill those gaps. The bill: 

  • directly regulates digital asset intermediaries, issuers, service providers, and other key actors, defining who regulates what at the federal level 
  • establishes clear liability based on activity  
  • empowers federal agencies to create and enforce new digital assets rules and explicitly ties OFAC’s sanction authority to digital assets.  
  • establishes a public–private partnership to monitor and combat illicit finance and leverage private-sector blockchain data and analytics to help law enforcement. 

Myth #2: The CLARITY Act gives software developers immunity from civil or criminal liability. 
Fact: The Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act clearly notes that if you do not transmit funds, you are not a money transmitter â€” combining BSA’s money transmitter provisions for financial intermediaries and protecting lawful software development and innovation. Entities that control or custody of customer assets remain fully subject to existing financial laws and the additional requirements established under the CLARITY Act. 

This does not modify anti–money laundering laws or limit prosecutions for fraud or sanctions evasion. It aligns with longstanding FinCEN guidance and the White House’s position that non-controlling; noncustodial developers are not money transmitters.  

Myth #3: The CLARITY Act would complicate law enforcement investigation and prosecution efforts. 
Fact: Civil and criminal regulations already apply to digital asset usage, and CLARITY specifically addresses how existing laws apply, enhancing law enforcement’s ability to police digital assets by: 

  • Offering real-time access to transparent and immutable transaction data on blockchains 
  • Creating efficiency for law enforcement to track, trace, and prosecute digital asset crime and follow illicit fund movements to catch bad actors.  
  • Increasing funding and tools needed by law enforcement to combat illicit finance in digital assets through 
  • new FinCEN appropriations (total proposed increase: $150 billion over 5 years): 
  • Funds would target digital assets kiosks to offer clear disclosure requirements and waiting periods for withdrawals  
  • The bill empowers the Treasury Department to make rules to crack down on suspected illicit activity between US and foreign financial institutions. 

Myth #5: The bill forces banks to adopt blockchain–based technologies and weakens the soundness of our financial system.
Fact: The CLARITY Act includes a dedicated title to set permissible activities and broadly allows banks to use distributed ledgers to perform, provide, or deliver anything they are already authorized to do and subject those activities to the same requirements as existing activities.  

  • This gives banks, credit unions, and financial holding companies the freedom to innovate without mandating the adoption of blockchain–based technologies.  
  • This gives consumers the ability to use banks they know and trust to custody their digital assets. 

Myth #6: The CLARITY Act gives decentralized finance (DeFi) a pass from meaningful accountability and oversight. 
Fact: The CLARITY Act applies oversight based on custody, control, and function, ensuring regulated obligations apply to entities that make sense. It directs regulators like FinCEN to clarify AML/CFT rules, preventing misuse of “decentralization” claims to avoid compliance. 

Myth #7: Market structure is only about financial markets. 
Fact: Market structure also has real implications for energy markets. By clarifying Bitcoin and other digital assets’ status as a digital commodity, the CLARITY Act could help attract domestic Bitcoin mining operations and support grid flexibility. 

Myth #8: The CLARITY Act creates a weaker regulatory regime for crypto firms compared to traditional financial institutions because it strips the SEC of critical authority over digital asset markets and investor protections.
Fact: The CLARITY Act defines where digital asset intermediaries fit into regulatory frameworks comparable to traditional finance while clarifying and preserving the SEC’s jurisdiction on customer asset segregation, disclosure requirements, and market integrity rules. Additionally: 

  • Brokers, dealers, exchanges, and custodians are required to register and comply with oversight regimes administered by both the SEC and CFTC.  
  • The SEC’s full authority over securities-related activity is codified and preserved, while the bill establishes clear jurisdictional boundaries between the SEC and CFTC for non-security digital assets. 
  • The bill specifically extends AML and risk controls under the BSA, including transaction monitoring authorities, temporary transaction holds, and formal risk management standards (Section 308). 

Myth #9: The CLARITY Act would leave consumers with fewer protections in digital asset markets. 
Fact: CLARITY strengthens consumer protections by requiring digital asset platforms to meet core safeguards common in traditional finance, including clear disclosures, fair dealing, and protection of customer funds.  

The bill requires customer asset segregation and enforceable operating standards, directly addressing risks like commingling and platform failures. The bill adds fraud detection and intervention tools to the BSA, such as transaction monitoring and temporary holds. 

Myth #10: The CLARITY Act is unnecessary. Existing securities and commodities laws provide sufficient authority. 
Fact: Existing securities and commodities laws are muddy and antiquated. 

  • The CLARITY Act creates certainty for firms, regulators, and consumers, filling in gaps by defining when a digital asset falls under SEC or CFTC jurisdiction.  
  • The bill creates tailored, enforceable requirements for digital asset intermediaries while extending BSA anti-money laundering and risk controls. 

Read our full breakdown here.

If you have any questions, please reach out to press@digitalchamber.org. 

60-Day GENIUS Act Sprint: TDC Responds to OCC

by Neil Humphrey

This Digital Chamber is excited to announce that we recently submitted four comprehensive responses to the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s (OCC) proposed rulemaking for the implementation of the GENIUS Act.

When sweeping legislation like the GENIUS Act transitions from statutory text to enforceable rules, the details matter immensely. The OCC’s rulemaking process will likely dictate the operational realities, compliance frameworks, and strategic landscapes of the digital asset industry for years to come.

When the OCC released its proposed rulemaking, it spanned almost 400 pages of dense and complex regulatory framework. Within those pages, the regulators posed 211 specific, highly technical questions to the public. We had less than 60 days to digest the text, analyze its implications, gather consensus, and draft our responses.

Over 20 TDC member companies and law firms stepped up to the plate, dedicating their time and insights to this massive undertaking, submitting over 100 pages of responsive material. Our coalition tackled the proposal head-on, providing thoughtful, detailed, and substantive feedback on almost all of the 211 questions presented by the OCC.

This achievement would have been impossible without the minds that guided us. A special thank you to the teams at Perkins Coie, Clifford Chance, and Morgan Lewis. These teams worked tirelessly around the clock to coordinate responses, synthesize diverse viewpoints from our member companies, and craft rigorously researched arguments. Their dedication, unparalleled expertise, and sheer hard work were the engines that drove this initiative across the finish line.

Together, we have not only met a massive regulatory challenge, but we have also actively shaped the future of the GENIUS Act. Thank you all for your unwavering commitment and exceptional work.

TDC Responses to OCC Rulemaking Proposal:

GROUP 1: Questions 1-24 (Definitions), 100-108 (Redemption), and 198-211 (General)

GROUP 2: Questions 25 -34 (Activities), 35 – 39 (Interest and Yield Prohibitions) and 174, 182 & 197 (Capital Requirements and OCC Assessments)

GROUP 3: Questions 44-99 (Reserve Assets) and 109-128 (Risk Management)

GROUP 4: Questions 129-137 (Audits, Reports, and Supervision), 149-166 (Custody) and 167-176 (Applications)

If you have any questions, please reach out to policy@digitalchamber.org.

Key White House AI Framework & Google Quantum Takeaways

by Neil Humphrey

In the final two weeks of March 2026, two significant documents were released: the White House’s National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence and a new white paper from Google Quantum AI on quantum vulnerabilities in blockchain cryptography. Below are our key takeaways from each, with links to the full TDC analyses at the bottom. 

White House National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence 

On March 20, 2026, the White House released its National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence â€“ legislative recommendations to Congress spanning seven subject areas, from child protection and intellectual property to workforce development and federal preemption of state AI laws. It carries no binding legal force, but represents the Administration’s preferences for where it wants Congress to go on AI. 

The most consequential provision is Section VII. If enacted, federal preemption would establish a single national AI standard, overriding the fragmented state-level regimes building in Colorado, California, Texas, Illinois, and elsewhere. States could not impose AI-specific disclosure mandates, impact assessments, or liability regimes beyond the federal floor â€“ a significant simplification for companies currently navigating conflicting requirements, though several states are likely to contest it in court. 

Also notable: Section V directs Congress not to create any new AI-specific regulatory body. Oversight would flow through existing regulators â€“ SEC, CFTC, FinCEN â€“ rather than a new agency, which has meaningful implications for digital asset companies whose AI tools already operate under financial regulatory frameworks. 

Our full section-by-section analysis covers all seven provisions and their implications for blockchain and digital asset companies. 

Google Quantum AI: Quantum Vulnerabilities in Blockchain Cryptography 

On March 30, 2026, a team at Google Quantum AI â€“ with collaborators from UC Berkeley, Stanford, and the Ethereum Foundation â€“ published revised estimates of the quantum computing resources needed to break Bitcoin and Ethereum’s cryptography. 

The core finding: using Shor’s Algorithm against the elliptic curve underlying both networks, the attack can be carried out with fewer than 500,000 physical qubits and completed in roughly nine minutes â€“ within Bitcoin’s ten-minute block window. That is approximately 20 times fewer resources than prior published estimates. Companies like Google and IBM are actively building hardware in this range. 

The exposure is substantial. Roughly 6.9 million BTC are currently in quantum-vulnerable address formats, including approximately 2.3 million in dormant wallets inactive for five or more years. Ethereum’s attack surface is broader, spanning its account model, smart contract admin keys, Proof-of-Stake validator signatures, and Layer 2 infrastructure. The paper also raises the policy question of what governments should do about dormant quantum-vulnerable assets before a capable quantum computer arrives â€“ and concludes the window for orderly post-quantum migration is narrowing faster than previously understood. 

Our full summary covers the attack scenarios, dormant asset governance options, and implications for exchanges, custodians, and institutional holders. 

From the AIQ Working Group 

The AIQ working group is continuing to track hardware developments at Google, IBM, IonQ, and others, alongside the White House Framework’s impact on Congress. More updates to follow. 

Read the Full White House AI Framework Analysis here.

Read the Full Google AI Quantum Report Summary here.

If you have any questions, please reach out to policy@digitalchamber.org. 

Arizona Sets the Standard: Digital Asset Reserves Next Act

by Megan Thorpe

By Anastasia Dellaccio, Executive Director, Digital Chamber State Network

 The states that move early and with intention will attract capital, talent, and infrastructure that underpins the next generation of financial systems. 

Arizona has advanced one of the most comprehensive state-level digital asset reserve frameworks in the country. The legislature recently passed SB 1649 and SB 1042, sending them to Governor Katie Hobbs’ desk, but whether they will be signed into law still remains uncertain.  

SB 1649 establishes a Digital Assets Strategic Reserve Fund managed by the State Treasurer, seeded with seized and forfeited digital assets at no new cost to taxpayers. The Treasurer is authorized to hold, invest, and where appropriate, lend those assets to generate returns. The bill proposes this effort be governed by a “cryptocurrency fair value” framework that evaluates assets on measurable criteria like market capitalization, network activity, and ecosystem development.  

SB 1042 would complement the reserve by enabling Arizona to diversify a small portion of public funds beyond traditional assets into high-potential digital assets. 

Why This Matters for Arizona’s Fiscal Future

As state debts and unfunded pension liabilities grow, governments face mounting pressure to protect long-term purchasing power without burdening taxpayers. Traditional portfolios have a mix of bonds, cash, and Treasuries. Digital assets offer states a new diversification opportunity, and Arizona’s framework is designed to capture that upside responsibly.

The digital asset industry has grown from roughly $10 billion in total market capitalization a decade ago to between $2 and $3 trillion today and shown increasing stability alongside sustained growth. Critically, SB 1649’s weighted, metrics-based framework for determining eligible assets means Arizona is not relying on a concentrated position on any single token. It is building a diversified digital asset allocation governed by principled, measurable criteria. That is the same discipline we expect from any well-managed public fund, now applied to an asset class most state treasuries haven’t yet had the tools to access.

Good Policy Built Right

Passing the legislation is step one. Implementation is the bigger challenge, and Arizona has the opportunity to set an example for state governments across the country

Diversify thoughtfully within the framework. SB 1649’s fair value framework was designed to allow Arizona to invest across a diversified mix of assets rather than concentrating exposure in a single token. As the Treasurer’s office operationalizes the fund, it should establish clear, repeatable processes for evaluating asset eligibility, reviewing portfolio composition regularly, and resisting any pressure to treat the fund as a single-asset vehicle. Diversification across digital assets with different use cases, network characteristics, and market dynamics is what transforms this reserve from a novelty into a durable fiscal tool.

Go beyond periodic attestation and build out the full reserve stack. As Arizona moves into the next phase of digital asset innovation, it should anchor its framework in transparency and durability. Across unclaimed assets, strategic reserves, and state stablecoin regulation, Arizona should aim for the ceiling in its digital asset administration. Traditional monthly audits show what was true at a single point in time, while programmatic, on-chain proof of reserves can show what is true continuously, every block, every second. But proof of reserves is only the foundation. Proof of composition provides transparency into the makeup of reserve assets to guard against concentration and tail risk, while proof of solvency can continuously demonstrate that total assets exceed liabilities.

Together, these layers distinguish a durable financial system from a compliance checkbox. This framework is ultimately about more than compliance; it’s about building enduring financial infrastructure and services that strengthen Arizona’s long-term fiscal stability. This also offers assurance to regulators that they can cover their bases by leveraging technology to hedge against risk.

Use the custodial flexibility the bill provides. SB 1649’s amended language recognizes secure custody solutions as qualified custodians, and the bill preserves the Treasurer’s ability to self-custody assets directly using technology providers. This is a wise choice, as it is typically more cost-effective, secure, and less exposed to third-party risk than relying exclusively on institutional custodians.

The Bigger Picture

Arizona’s move is not just about reserves. It is a signal. A signal that states are beginning to treat digital assets as a strategic asset class, a legitimate investment opportunity, and a clear message to innovators that Arizona is open for business.

The Digital Chamber State Network stands ready to help ensure what comes next matches the ambition of what has just been achieved.

Maryland Leads the Way: Turning Digital Asset Policy into Progress 

by Megan Thorpe

By Anastasia Dellaccio, Executive Director, Digital Chamber State Network | Jacqui Cooper, CEO, Maryland Blockchain Association 

At its best, digital asset policy is not only about markets or technology. It is about expanding access, strengthening protections, and creating real opportunities. For Maryland communities, from the unbanked to students, to entrepreneurs and workers across the state, they are seeing the benefits of clarity, coordination, and bipartisan action in their legislature to ensure that opportunities for jobs and innovation can flourish in their state. 

As Governor Wes Moore recently underscored at The Digital Chamber’s DC Blockchain Summit, “Innovative technologies like blockchain must work for everyone, including underbanked communities.” Maryland is not just embracing that vision. It is putting it into action.  

The 2026 legislative session will be remembered in Maryland as the year digital asset policy moved from conversation to commitment. As the 2026 legislative session draws to a close, the state has clearly asserted that Maryland is open for business. Lawmakers advanced a cohesive, bipartisan set of policies designed to move blockchain technology from theory into real-world applications and, on a broader scale, have positioned the state to compete for digital assets jobs by embracing responsible innovation. 

Building the Legal Foundation 

The 2026 legislative session will be remembered in Maryland as the year digital asset policy moved from conversation to commitment. 

At the heart of this session, progress is SB 154, which modernizes Maryland’s commercial code to recognize controllable electronic records. Though not flashy, this foundational move aligns UCC Article 12 and considers adopting provisions for Controllable Electronic Records. Simply stated, Maryland has modernized its commercial law to recognize and protect digital assets with the same rigor as traditional physical property. For consumers and businesses, this means digital assets are just like other asset classes, which can be owned, transferred, financed, and secured with distinct legal clarity. 

Putting Blockchain to Work 

Maryland is equally focused on harnessing blockchain technology for tangible public value. SB 168 / HB 810 is now headed to the Governor’s desk and means the state will actively study evaluating recording real property titles on blockchain-based systems. By piloting blockchain-based title verification, the state is making a concrete investment in modern technology that will reduce fraud, streamline transactions, and shine a light on systems traditionally burdened by inefficiency and opacity.  

Playing the Long Game 

Maryland’s work is smart and likely to be successful because it is built on a foundation of technical expertise. 

SB 376 / HB 470 establishes a Digital Asset and Blockchain Technology Task Force, creating a standing engine for the state to continue to lead in policy development. This task force will offer a low-risk, low-cost, and transparent path to policymaking, while enabling lawmakers to build internal expertise, compare approaches taken by peer states, and assess real-world use cases. By doing this work before committing public resources or adopting specific rules, Maryland is more likely to continue their practical and bipartisan regulatory efforts. 

Meanwhile, SB 662 / HB 1355, the Maryland Stablecoin Act, is advancing a clear, credible framework for payment stablecoins, providing the consumer protections and banking standards necessary for digital dollars to flourish in the state’s economy. Although this legislation needs some improvement, primarily around reserves and a few other standards, it does a good job at adhering closely to the federal law, the GENIUS Act, and creating nimble efforts to adapt to future industry needs. 

Next Opportunities 

Not every blockchain legislative effort in Maryland advanced this session, and that matters too. 

Unfortunately, SB 759 / HB 859, which addressed staking and broader financial innovation, did not advance out of committee. Marylanders deserve access to staking-as-a-service offerings, as described in this legislation. The industry’s coalition has engaged in educating policymakers around this topic, and staking legislation remains a top priority as it signals a long-term commitment to sophisticated financial technology.  

The Maryland Blockchain Association calls these education efforts its “Lighthouse” strategy and will continue to push for clarity that attracts serious players and builds a real, durable digital assets innovation ecosystem. 

The next opportunity is the Maryland BlockchAIn Bootcamp & Workforce Expo, will be held from July 13–17, 2026, at Capitol Technology University. The Expo will gather consumers, students, businesses, state leaders, and the new cohort of The Blockchain Legal Institute’s Business of Blockchain Interns to demonstrate real-world applications for blockchain technology. A Replicable Blueprint 

Groups that share Maryland’s ambition are beginning to take root in other states. Together, The Digital Chamber’s State Network and the Maryland Blockchain Association have partnered to help increase awareness of the facts around blockchain.  

We commend the Maryland lawmakers who drove this progress, including Delegate Boafo, Senator Watson, Delegate Amprey, Senator Hayes, and Senator West. Their leadership reflects exactly the kind of policymaking this moment demands, grounded not just in innovation, but in impact. We look forward to our continued work with them to ensure that Maryland continues to prioritize the values of privacy, freedom, and innovation that Marylanders deserve. 

TDC DeFi Policy Principles

by Neil Humphrey

Non-Custodial DeFi Policy Principles 

  1. Regulatory Obligations Should Follow Custody or Control 
    • Financial regulatory obligations should apply to entities that custody user assets or exercise discretionary control over transactions on behalf of users. 
  1. Non-Custodial Developers Are Not Money Transmitters 
    • Developers who do not hold or control users’ digital assets should not be subject to financial regulations simply for building, publishing, or maintaining open-source DeFi software. 
  1. Permissionless Protocols Are Infrastructure, Not Intermediaries 
    • Open source, permissionless protocols are core digital infrastructure, and should be treated as such.  Classifying these protocols as financial intermediaries, whether as money transmitters, money services businesses, or other financial institutions, fundamentally mischaracterizes what they are and how they function. 
  1. Software Maintenance Does Not Create Financial Intermediary Status 
    • Financial regulators should clarify that maintaining, upgrading, or debugging non-custodial protocols, liquidity pools, smart contracts, oracles, or similar infrastructure does not make an individual or organization a financial intermediary. 
  1. Developer Protections Apply Across the Protocol Lifecycle 
    • Legal protections for open-source protocol development should extend to the full lifecycle of decentralized systems, including deployment, upgrades, security improvements, and ongoing maintenance. 
  1. Law Should Distinguish Between Digital Assets and Smart Contract Software 
    • Regulatory frameworks should clearly differentiate between digital assets, which function as property, and open-source smart contracts, which are software infrastructure (not property). 
  1. Developers Are Not Liable for Third-Party Use of Open Infrastructure 
    • Developers who create open-source software tools should not face civil or criminal liability solely for the independent actions of third parties who use those tools. 

Intermediated (Institutional) DeFi Policy Principles 

  1. Intermediaries Bear Compliance Obligations When Using DeFi 
    • Financial intermediaries and custodians that access DeFi protocols on behalf of clients should remain responsible for regulatory compliance obligations. 
    • Developers who build or maintain related smart contract software should not be treated as financial intermediaries solely for creating the underlying code. 
  1. Regulatory Obligations Follow Institutional Control 
    • Maintaining or upgrading decentralized infrastructure should not trigger financial intermediary status, though regulatory and data protection obligations should apply when such systems are created, owned, and operated by financial institutions. 
    1. Protect Proprietary Financial Software and Assign Responsibility Accordingly
      • When financial infrastructure is built using proprietary code or intellectual property—such as smart contracts, liquidity pools, vaults, algorithms, or AI agents—it should not be treated as open-source software.
      • Entities that control or deploy such proprietary systems should bear regulatory obligations proportionate to the financial activities those systems perform on behalf of users. 
      1. Institutional Use of DeFi Supports Fiduciary Obligations 
        • Digital asset institutions have the fiduciary obligation to act in the best interest of their clients.
        • Institutions should therefore not be excluded from leveraging DeFi vaults, protocols and platforms to perform their duty of best execution. 

          If you have any questions, please reach out to policy@digitalchamber.org. 

          AI Agent Identity & Security Standards

          by Neil Humphrey

          Jean-Philippe Beaudet & Jonathan Rufrano

          Why We Filed 

          Over the past several weeks, TDC’s AI + Quantum and Compliance & Cybersecurity Working Groups led the preparation and submission of two formal public comments to the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST). Both filings respond to government requests for industry input on how AI agent systems should be identified, authenticated, authorized, and secured â€“ questions that sit squarely at the intersection of our members’ work. 

          As autonomous agents gain the ability to execute financial transactions, access proprietary data, call APIs, and interact with other agents, the rules governing their identity and authority will shape the architecture of the systems your organizations are building right now. TDC’s goal in filing is to ensure that those rules are informed by the technical reality our members navigate daily and to establish TDC as a credible, expert voice in a policy space that will define AI deployment for years to come. 

          What We Responded To 

          Filing 1: NIST CAISI – Security Considerations for AI Agents (March 2026) 

          The Center for AI Standards and Innovation (CAISI) requested information on security threats, risks, and practices affecting AI agent systems across the full deployment lifecycle. TDC’s response drew on members’ hands-on experience in financial services, digital asset custody, blockchain security infrastructure, and agentic commerce. 

          Filing 2: NIST NCCoE â€“ Software and AI Agent Identity and Authorization (April 2026)

          The National Cybersecurity Center of Excellence (NCCoE) proposed a new project exploring how software and AI agents should be identified and authorized, initially scoped to enterprise deployments. TDC’s response addressed six question categories spanning use cases, existing standards, identification, authentication, authorization, auditing, and prompt injection defense. 

          Our High-Level Recommendations 

          Core principle: Build from existing standards rather than creating parallel AI-specific frameworks from scratch. The building blocks already exist—they need to be extended, not reinvented. 

          Across both filings, TDC advanced four interconnected recommendations: 

          1. Expand the project scope beyond enterprise-only use cases. Consumer-facing and government AI agent deployments introduce identity and authorization risks that enterprise frameworks may not address â€“ and standards that fail to account for all three segments will produce gaps from day one. 
          2. Prioritize adaptation of mature, widely-deployed protocols. Standards like OAuth 2.0, NIST SP 800-63, SPIFFE/SPIRE, W3C Verifiable Credentials, and ISO/IEC 18013 (mDL) already provide robust foundations. The right approach is to extend these â€“ not replace them â€“ to accommodate non-human, autonomous actors.
          3. Treat agent identity and authorization as distinct layers. Authentication establishes who an agent is; authorization determines what it is permitted to do. Conflating these layers is a root cause of current over-permissioning in agentic deployments. 
          4. Design for accountability at scale. Every agent action should be cryptographically attributable to a verifiable identity, a delegating human principal, and an auditable authorization chain – before those agents are managing financial assets or acting across enterprise systems.

          If you have any questions, please reach out to policy@digitalchamber.org. 

          Delaware Senate Moves Forward on Blockchain Task Force

          by Simi Awe

          What Happened:  

          On March 24, 2026, Anastasia Dellaccio, Executive Director of State and Regional Affairs at TDC State Network, testified before the Delaware State Senate in support of SCR 143 legislation sponsored by Senator Darius J. Brown and Rep. Michael Smith to create a task force evaluating blockchain and digital innovation policy in Delaware. 

          Following her testimony, SCR 143 passed the committee. Delaware continues to lead on financial innovation, demonstrating its commitment to thoughtful, forward-looking policies that support the growth of blockchain and digital technology.

          Why it matters: 

          • Delaware is home to over 1 million businesses, including 60% of the Fortune 500 companies, and is a cornerstone of the U.S. financial services sector.
          • The task force offers a low-risk, low-cost, transparent pathway to explore blockchain applications, engage with industry, and build expertise before adopting policies. 
          • States are increasingly shaping digital asset rules as federal policy evolves. 

          Dellaccio’s Take: 

          “Blockchain studies and task forces such as the one proposed here offer a low-risk, low-cost, and transparent pathway to policymaking in a highly technical and rapidly evolving area. They allow lawmakers to build internal expertise, compare approaches across jurisdictions, engage with industry, and evaluate practical use cases before committing public resources or adopting policies that may become difficult to unwind. If developed in a way that embraces innovation while establishing appropriate consumer protections, this Task Force can provide Delaware with clear, implementation-ready guidance that strengthens the state’s economic competitiveness, supports its workforce, and ensures it remains at the center of modern financial infrastructure.”  

          Looking Ahead:  

          SCR 143 could lead to pilot programs, regulatory frameworks, new governance structures like DUNAs, and applications in digital identity, supply chain tracking, and modernizing land and property records. 

          You can watch her full testimony here or read the full written testimony below:  

          Read The Testimony

          If you have any questions, please reach out to policy@digitalchamber.org. 

          Five State Blockchain Leaders Awarded First TDC State Network Grants at the DC Blockchain Summit 2026

          by Nicole Rankin

          Five organizations from across the United States were recognized at the DC Blockchain Summit as the first recipients of The Digital Chamber’s State Network grants. The program supports grassroots leaders advancing digital asset education, non-partisan policy development, and adoption at the state level.

          Last week at the DC Blockchain Summit, The Digital Chamber’s State Network announced the first-ever recipients of its competitive grant program. Selected from 41 applicants nationwide, five organizations from Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Utah, and West Virginia were recognized for their work advancing digital asset education and policy in their states.

          Why it matters:
          State governments are playing an increasingly important role in shaping the regulatory environment for digital assets. By supporting grassroots leaders who are working directly with policymakers and communities, TDC’s State Network aims to accelerate education, collaboration, policy development, and responsible blockchain adoption across the country.

          “TDC’s State Network is about empowering grassroots leaders advocating for smart digital asset policy in their states,” said Anastasia Dellaccio, Executive Director of TDC’s State Network. “These organizations are on the front lines of digital asset policy development, and the work they are doing to develop sensible solutions at the state level is critical to the future of the industry nationwide.”

          Each organization received $2,000 in funding to support projects that strengthen engagement between policymakers, industry leaders, and local communities.

          Meet the 2026 Grant Recipients

          Convergence Tech Policy Institute (C:TPI)
          C:TPI is a global think tank in Illinois, focused on the intersection of AI, blockchain, and quantum policy. With support from this grant, the organization will host a reception during the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) Summit in Chicago this July, bringing together policymakers and technology leaders to discuss cybersecurity and emerging technology governance.

          Maryland Blockchain Association (MDBA)
          The Maryland Blockchain Association is a nonprofit coalition uniting industry, government, and academia to advance Bitcoin, Web3 innovation, and responsible digital asset policy across the state. Led by Jacqueline Cooper, Esq., known in the community as “CryptoMom2,” MDBA is actively engaged in shaping Maryland’s legislative landscape on issues ranging from blockchain real estate applications and cryptocurrency staking to stablecoin legislation and the state’s Digital Asset and Blockchain Technology Task Force. Their grant will support Blockchain Bootcamp, a career-focused conference coming to Maryland this July.

          Detroit Blockchain Center (DBC)
          The Detroit Blockchain Center is Michigan’s premier 501(c)(3) organization, focused on blockchain, crypto, AI, and emerging technology education. Founded in 2018, the organization helps individuals and institutions better understand decentralized technologies while supporting startups building in the state. The grant will help launch DBC’s policy education track, including legislative roundtables, fireside discussions, and voter education content designed to make digital asset policy more accessible to Michigan stakeholders.

          Utah Blockchain Coalition (UBC)
          The Utah Blockchain Coalition advances blockchain-focused public policy initiatives and works to educate government officials on the benefits of the technology. With this grant, UBC will convene elected officials, innovators, and policy advocates for a working session on key blockchain trends and how Utah can position itself for responsible digital asset adoption.

          West Virginia Blockchain Foundation
          The West Virginia Blockchain Foundation connects legislators, universities, and communities across Appalachia to the economic and technological opportunities created by blockchain and emerging technologies. Their grant will support a series of in-person and virtual policy education workshops engaging state legislators, county officials, student leaders, and community stakeholders across West Virginia and the greater Ohio Valley.

          What’s Next

          These five organizations represent the kind of grassroots leadership driving progress in digital asset policy at the state level. As they begin implementing their projects throughout 2026, The Digital Chamber’s State Network will continue supporting their work through collaboration, resources, and connections across the digital asset ecosystem.

          If you missed the announcement at the DC Blockchain Summit, you can watch the full session here.

          TDC’s State Network Announces its First Competitive Grant Winners  

          by Megan Thorpe

          Washington, DC (March 17, 2026) — At the DC Blockchain Summit today, The Digital Chamber awarded the first TDC State Network grants to organizations from Illinois, Maryland, Michigan, Utah, and West Virginia. These groups stood out from 41 applicants for their action-oriented proposals aimed at advancing education, policy development, and adoption of digital assets in their states.  
           
          “TDC’s State Network is about empowering grassroots leaders that are advocating for smart digital asset policy at the state level.  We have found the best way to support these local builders, many of whom are volunteers, is to provide funding that allows them to turn their policy initiatives into action. These leading organizations are on the front line of digital asset policy action in their states, and the contributions they make towards developing sensible policy solutions at the state level is critical to the future of the industry across the nation.” said State Network’s Executive Director, Anastasia Dellaccio. 
           
          Each recipient was selected based on key criteria, including stated goals and policy alignment with TDC’s digital assets policy goals, and will receive $2000 to continue to grow in their community. 

          The recipients announced today at the DC Blockchain Summit are: 
           
          Illinois: The Convergence Tech Policy Institute (C:TPI) from Illinois is a global think tank mapping AI, blockchain, and quantum policy collisions to deliver trusted safeguards before $10T+ in infrastructure is at risk. They plan to build the Policy Convergence Index™ and Chicago Accord to secure a quantum-safe internet—where tech converges, policy leads. With their grant money, they plan to host a reception during the National Conference of State Legislatures (NCSL) summit in Chicago, July 27-29, 2026, focused on the NCSL Tech & Communications Committee and the NCSL Cyber-security & Privacy Task Force.  

          Maryland: The Maryland Blockchain Association (MDBA)  is a nonprofit coalition that is focusing on uniting and educating industry, government, and academia within Maryland to advance Bitcoin, Web3 innovation, and responsible digital asset policy throughout the state.  This year, the MDBA will be hosting a major conference, the Blockchain Bootcamp, bringing industry participants to Maryland to exhibit and lead career development workshops from July 13th to July 17th. This will be the first major conference in Maryland focusing on blockchain and related technology career opportunities. Under the leadership of Jacqueline Cooper, Esq.—a prominent legal expert, educator, entrepreneur, and author known as “CryptoMom2″—the association focuses on bridging knowledge gaps and fostering a skilled workforce for high-demand careers in the digital economy. In 2026, the MDBA is actively shaping Maryland’s legislative landscape by participating in supporting education across a variety of introduced legislation to include blockchain applications (real estate), cryptocurrency staking, a stablecoin reserve bill, and the formalization of the state’s Digital Asset and Blockchain Technology Task Force, and as well as advocating for commercial law updates to the Uniform Commercial Code.  The Association and the volunteers supporting the organization continue to empower Marylanders with the technical literacy and tools necessary to thrive in the “Regulatory Renaissance.” 

          Michigan: The Detroit Blockchain Center (DBC) is the state’s premier 501(c)(3) dedicated to blockchain, crypto, AI, and emerging tech education. As the leading blockchain educator, formed in 2018 in Michigan, the Detroit Blockchain Center helps individuals and organizations better understand blockchain/web3 technology; attracts and encourages outside investments into businesses building on decentralized systems in Michigan; and creates opportunities for area blockchain/Web3 startups and entrepreneurs. This grant will serve as a seed investment to launch and strengthen DBC’s policy education track, delivered through events, legislative roundtables, fireside discussions, and voter education/awareness content that translates digital-asset policy into plain language for Michigan stakeholders. 

           
          Utah: The Utah Blockchain Coalition is an association in Utah that drives blockchain-centric public policy initiatives to educate government officials about the benefits of blockchain technology and a strong community ecosystem in Utah. With this grant, the UBC plans to convene elected officials, innovators, and policy advocates for a discussion and informative working session around key blockchain trends and how Utah should position itself legislatively for digital asset adoption. 
           
          West Virginia: The West Virginia Blockchain Foundation works to expand digital asset education and economic opportunities by connecting legislators, universities, and communities across Appalachia to the benefits of blockchain and emerging technologies. With this grant, the WV Blockchain Foundation will deliver a series of in-person and virtual blockchain policy education workshops designed to engage state legislators, county officials, student leaders, and community stakeholders across West Virginia and the greater Ohio Valley. 

          ABOUT THE DIGITAL CHAMBER’S STATE NETWORK  

          The Digital Chamber’s State Network, a project of The Digital Chamber, is a non-partisan program that establishes a collaborative ecosystem connecting policymakers, regulators, industry, and innovators to advance blockchain adoption and digital asset integration across the United States.  
            
          ABOUT THE DIGITAL CHAMBER  

          The Digital Chamber is a non-profit organization committed to promoting global blockchain adoption. We envision a fair and inclusive digital and financial ecosystem where everyone has the opportunity to participate. Access to digital assets is not merely a technological advancement but a fundamental human right, crucial for economic and social empowerment. Through targeted education, advocacy, and strategic collaborations with government and industry stakeholders, we drive innovation and shape policies that create a favorable environment for the blockchain technology ecosystem.   

          The Digital Chamber’s umbrella includes: CryptoUK, Digital Power Network (DPN), TDC’s Digital State Network, and Treasury Council.  

          ###  

          For media inquiries, contact press@digitalchamber.org   

           Follow The Digital Chamber I LinkedIn I Twitter I Instagram