Law of Code

What were the most important legal and regulatory developments in crypto this month? In this episode, we review developments from stablecoin rulemaking and DeFi liability cases to the ongoing fight over prediction markets. Jonathan Schmalfeld is Director of Policy at The Digital Chamber, where he focuses on crypto policy, digital asset legislation, and regulatory developments in Washington.Timestamps➡️ 1:07 — SEC guidance allowing broker-dealers to apply a 2% capital haircut to payment stablecoins➡️ 4:37 — OCC’s GENIUS Act implementation proposal and the debate over stablecoin yield restrictions➡️ 11:14 — The Promoting Innovation and Blockchain Development Act and developer liability protections➡️ 17:27 — Federal court dismissal of claims against Uniswap and what it means for DeFi developers➡️ 22:55 — How Kalshi enforced insider trading rules in its CFTC-regulated prediction markets➡️ 27:37 — Kalshi’s preliminary injunction against Tennessee regulators and the federal preemption fight➡️ 31:15 — Why prediction market litigation could eventually reach the U.S. Supreme Court➡️ 36:25 — Institutional adoption: Morgan Stanley custody plans, Kraken’s Fed master account, and crypto banking licenses➡️ 40:24 — Operation Chokepoint 2.0 and proposed rules eliminating “reputational risk” in bank supervision➡️ 43:23 — Why competition between crypto and traditional finance is acceleratingSponsor: Day One Law, a boutique corporate law firm founded by Nick Pullman. Nick and his team at Day One provide strategic legal counsel to startups, crypto projects, and Web3 innovators. ⁠You can get in contact with them via this link⁠: ⁠⁠https://www.dayonelaw.xyz/#contactResources: 📃 Updated SEC Division of Trading & Markets FAQ✍️ Hester Peirce statement on updated SEC FAQ📃 OCC Notice of proposed rulemaking for implementation of the GENIUS Act 📓 Promoting Innovation in Blockchain Development Act of 2026 📃 Kansas City Fed statement on Kraken’s fed master accountDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

What happens when a crypto policy lawyer decides to run for one of the most powerful regulatory positions in the United States — New York Attorney General?Khurram Dara is a former policy team member at Coinbase and regulatory policy principal at Bain Capital Crypto. After years working in crypto regulation and policy, he left the private sector to run for the Republican nomination for Attorney General of New York, focusing his campaign on reversing lawfare, regulatory overreach, and using the role of New York Attorney general to shape national policy.Timestamps➡️ 1:24 — Coinbase, the SEC, and why regulation-by-enforcement pushed Dara toward politics➡️ 4:13 — Why state attorneys general have become “regulators of last resort”➡️ 9:30 — Running for office without prior political experience➡️ 11:31 — How statewide campaigns actually start: conventions, delegates, and ballot access➡️ 17:02 — Campaign execution: fundraising, messaging, and building a political operation➡️ 24:27 — What Dara learned about fundraising and donor dynamics➡️ 28:08 — What “lawfare” means and why it concerns the crypto industry➡️ 33:08 — The economic impact of regulation through litigation➡️ 37:40 — How state AG offices could be reformed➡️ 45:45 — Why state-level crypto regulation may be the next battlegroundSponsor: This episode is brought to you by the Decentralization Research Center (DRC), a nonprofit think tank advocating for decentralization in emerging technologies. Learn more at thedrcenter.org.Resources: 👨‍⚖️ SEC Dismissal of Civil Enforcement Against Coinbase 📄 Press release for Attorney General James’ lawsuit against Trump family financial business 📄 Press release for Oregon lawsuit against Coinbase Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

If blockchain systems can automatically enforce transactions, does that mean code itself determines legal rights and ownership?Carla Reyes and Andrea Tosato are professors researching digital assets at the SMU Dedman School of Law and Andrew Hinkes is a partner at Winston & Strawn LLP. Together they authored the paper “Code Is Not Law,” which examines why legal rights in digital assets ultimately depend on law rather than technological systems.Time Stamps:➡️ 1:30 — Stablecoin yield debates and why banks are back at the negotiating table➡️ 4:24 — Trade associations vs. decision-makers in White House crypto meetings➡️ 7:43 — Ethics provisions and constitutional challenges shaping negotiations➡️ 12:48 — Network token frameworks, ancillary assets, and draft bill trends➡️ 14:38 — DeFi intermediaries: software providers vs. financial actors➡️ 17:44 — Disclosure quality vs. disclosure volume in market structure drafts➡️ 21:38 — Legislation vs. agency guidance vs. litigation: three regulatory paths➡️ 24:30 — What retail users would actually notice if market structure passes➡️ 30:08 — Global competition: MiCA, Singapore MAS, and U.S. brain drain risk➡️ 43:51 — Regulatory moats, incumbents, and the future of innovationSponsor: This episode is brought to you by the Decentralization Research Center (DRC), a nonprofit think tank advocating for decentralization in emerging technologies. Learn more at thedrcenter.org.Resources: 📓 "Code is not law" research paper🎧 Episode #75 -  UCC Article 12 Amendments with Drew Hinkes and Andrea TosatoDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

What role are ethics provisions and stablecoin yield debates, playing in shaping — or potentially delaying — U.S. crypto market structure legislation?Gerald Gallagher is General Counsel at Sei Labs and co-host of the Crypto in America podcast, where he covers crypto policy, regulation, and legal developments in Washington.Timestamps:➡️ 1:30 — Stablecoin yield debates and why banks are back at the negotiating table➡️ 4:24 — Trade associations vs. decision-makers in White House crypto meetings➡️ 7:43 — Ethics provisions and constitutional challenges shaping negotiations➡️ 12:48 — Network token frameworks, ancillary assets, and draft bill trends➡️ 14:38 — DeFi intermediaries: software providers vs. financial actors➡️ 17:44 — Disclosure quality vs. disclosure volume in market structure drafts➡️ 21:38 — Legislation vs. agency guidance vs. litigation: three regulatory paths➡️ 24:30 — What retail users would actually notice if market structure passes➡️ 30:08 — Global competition: MiCA, Singapore MAS, and U.S. brain drain risk➡️ 43:51 — Regulatory moats, incumbents, and the future of innovationSponsor: This episode is brought to you by the Decentralization Research Center (DRC), a nonprofit think tank advocating for decentralization in emerging technologies. Learn more at thedrcenter.org.Resources: 📓 The latest market structure discussion draft (banking committee)📓 ⁠The GENIUS ActDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Can companies raise capital and issue securities directly on-chain without intermediaries or lawyers?Gabe Shapiro is the founder of MetaLeX and a longtime crypto lawyer focused on tokenization, legal automation, and decentralized capital markets.Timestamps: ➡️ 1:20 — Stablecoins, DeFi “kill switches,” and the new crypto narrative➡️ 5:44 — Why custodial assets create governance power over blockchains➡️ 11:04 — Tokenized securities vs. today’s DTCC intermediary model➡️ 21:36 — How MetaLeX enables direct issuer-to-investor capital raises➡️ 23:12 — Private keys as legal signatures and atomic deal execution➡️ 27:58 — Privacy concerns and on-chain legal infrastructure➡️ 33:43 — Low-KYC accreditation and composable legal credentials➡️ 34:23 — Reversibility, bearer instruments, and issuer controls➡️ 39:34 — TradFi, L2s, and whether Wall Street is “eating crypto”➡️ 43:38 — What regulators are missing: CFTC derivatives rules and UCC reformSponsor: This episode is brought to you by the Decentralization Research Center (DRC), a nonprofit think tank advocating for decentralization in emerging technologies. Learn more at thedrcenter.org.Resources:📄 Dragonfly Capital's Article "Ethereum is now unforkable, thanks to DeFi" 📄 Shapiro's Article "cyberSign: easy legal agreements on Ethereum"Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Crypto’s current policy window in Washington is a rare opportunity to pass market structure legislation. What happens if the industry walks away from a compromise now?Bill Hughes, Senior Counsel and Director of Global Regulatory Matters at Consensys, joins the podcast to discuss crypto market structure and stablecoin policy.Timestamps➡️ 1:10 — Why Agriculture and Banking Committees shape crypto legislation➡️ 4:20 — How agencies influence drafting behind the scenes➡️ 6:40 — Stablecoin yield and illicit finance: the real sticking points➡️ 9:20 — DeFi regulation debates➡️ 17:00 — Is the Clarity Act likely to pass in 2026?➡️ 18:00 — Ethics provisions and political tensions➡️ 20:13 — Coinbase’s strategy➡️ 26:35 — Stablecoin yield fights ➡️ 33:00 — Legislative timelines ➡️ 45:36 — What to watch nextSponsor: Day One Law, a boutique corporate law firm founded by Nick Pullman. Nick and his team at Day One provide strategic legal counsel to startups, crypto projects, and Web3 innovators. ⁠You can get in contact with them via this link⁠: ⁠⁠https://www.dayonelaw.xyz/#contact Resources:📓 The latest market structure discussion draft (banking committee)📓 ⁠The GENIUS ActDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

How should employees, contractors, and companies think about token compensation? What are the legal, tax, and governance risks?Jessica Furr is a lawyer focused on crypto compensation, governance, and market structure, and the author of Read the Fine Print on Token Compensation. Brandon Ferrick is a crypto and securities lawyer who advises companies on token incentive plans, equity compensation, and regulatory compliance.Timestamps: ➡️ 1:28 — Why tokens are not equity (and why people assume they are)➡️ 3:32 — Why token compensation exists alongside equity➡️ 6:39 — What documents to look for in a token comp arrangement➡️ 9:24 — Are tokens securities? How lawyers actually approach classification➡️ 11:57 — Restricted Token Awards (RTAs) vs. Restricted Token Units (RTUs)➡️ 13:28 — How tax treatment drives RTA vs. RTU decisions➡️ 16:49 — What an 83(b) election is and why it matters for tokens➡️ 21:16 — What employees should negotiate and clarify upfront➡️ 25:45 — Emerging trends in token compensation structures➡️ 28:28 — Where token compensation could go nextSponsor: This episode is brought to you by the Decentralization Research Center (DRC), a nonprofit think tank advocating for decentralization in emerging technologies. Learn more at thedrcenter.org.Resources: 📕 Jessica and Brandon's paper Read the Fine Print: Token Compensation📄 Rule 701 of the Securities Act📓 Dragonfly Compensation ReportDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

How do prediction markets actually work, and why are state gaming regulators and the CFTC battling over who has jurisdiction to regulate?Samir Patel is an attorney at Holland & Knight, where he focuses on gambling law, prediction markets, and the intersection of crypto, derivatives, and state gaming regulation.Timestamps:➡️ 1:02 — What prediction markets are and how binary contracts work➡️ 2:51 — Prediction markets vs. sports gambling: what’s legally different?➡️ 4:02 — Are prediction markets actually “on-chain”?➡️ 7:37 — The CFTC vs. state gaming regulators: who has jurisdiction?➡️ 9:55 — Swaps, self-certification, and the Commodities Exchange Act➡️ 12:06 — How courts are splitting on federal preemption➡️ 14:39 — Why the CFTC’s silence matters more than the lawsuits themselves➡️ 18:58 — DCMs vs. FCMs: mapping the regulatory plumbing➡️ 22:00 — Prediction markets as information tools, not just bets➡️ 23:30 — What this litigation could mean for crypto and DeFi governanceSponsor: This episode is brought to you by the Decentralization Research Center (DRC), a nonprofit think tank advocating for decentralization in emerging technologies. Learn more at thedrcenter.org.Resources:📓 Commodity Exchange Act (CEA)📓 CFTC Rule 40.11📄 CFTC Staff Advisory Withdrawal of Prior Guidance on Events ContractsDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

What could the future of U.S. crypto regulation look like from the CFTC—and how should regulators approach tokenization, prediction markets, and stablecoins as digital finance moves on-chain?Chris Giancarlo is Senior Counsel for Corporate and Financial Services at Willkie Farr & Gallagher and the former Chair of the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission, where he oversaw the regulation of futures, options, and swaps markets, including the launch of Bitcoin futures.Timestamps:➡️ 1:15 — Advice for new CFTC Chair Mike Selig➡️ 3:06 — Why crypto inverts the CFTC’s traditional regulatory model➡️ 6:53 — How the SEC and CFTC should divide authority over digital assets➡️ 8:54 — Why the commodity vs. security distinction still matters➡️ 15:13 — DTCC’s no-action relief and the future of tokenized market infrastructure➡️ 19:27 — Will TradFi absorb crypto—or will crypto reshape TradFi?➡️ 21:46 — Prediction markets, federal preemption, and state resistance➡️ 27:40 — Why prediction markets need regulation, not suppression➡️ 29:42 — Stablecoins, privacy, and exporting U.S. values through digital dollarsSponsor: This episode is brought to you by the Decentralization Research Center (DRC), a nonprofit think tank advocating for decentralization in emerging technologies. Learn more at thedrcenter.org.Resources📺 Recording of the CFTC / SEC Joint Event on Harmonization📓 GENIUS Act📄 DTCC No Action LetterDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Why are crypto custody rules for registered investment advisors due for modernization — and what could a future-proof framework look like?Sarah Helena Brennan is the General Counsel for Delphi Ventures, and Jay Stolkin is the Deputy General Counsel at Multicoin Capital. Timestamps:➡️ 0:05 — Why the custody rule matters for crypto➡️ 1:27 — The SEC’s safeguarding proposal and why this paper was written➡️ 5:58 — What the custody rule and “qualified custodians” actually require➡️ 10:26 — Why digital assets challenge legacy custody assumptions➡️ 14:47 — Fees, loss of utility, and concentration risk under the status quo➡️ 18:21 — The case for optionality and a flexible custody framework➡️ 22:53 — The five core tenets of cryptoasset safeguarding➡️ 25:50 — Lessons from the privately offered securities exemption➡️ 28:27 — On-chain verification, auditors, and real-time transparency➡️ 32:16 — Where regulators may push back—and what comes nextSponsor: Day One Law, a boutique corporate law firm founded by Nick Pullman. Nick and his team at Day One provide strategic legal counsel to startups, crypto projects, and Web3 innovators. ⁠You can get in contact with them via this link⁠: ⁠⁠https://www.dayonelaw.xyz/#contact Resources: 📄 Sarah and Jay’s Whitepaper📓 SEC Agency Rule ListDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

What should the industry be watching in 2026?Drew Hinkes is a partner at Winston & Strawn and a longtime crypto lawyer whose work spans DeFi, market structure, tokenization, and digital asset regulation. Timestamps:➡️ 1:53 — Tokenization, RWAs, and institutional crypto’s next phase➡️ 4:00 — Market structure gaps and DeFi’s unresolved treatment➡️ 6:09 — AML creep and the risk to permissionless finance➡️ 8:15 — Why DeFi depends on interfaces—and where regulation can bite➡️ 12:28 — Grey areas after market structure: why uncertainty remains➡️ 17:05 — Equity vs. tokens and what token holders are actually promised➡️ 23:57 — Tokenization vs. TradFi capture: competition or consolidation➡️ 29:03 — The biggest systemic risks to crypto in 2026➡️ 31:17 — Crypto’s most underappreciated source of resilienceSponsor: This episode is brought to you by the Decentralization Research Center (DRC), a nonprofit think tank advocating for decentralization in emerging technologies. Learn more at thedrcenter.org. Resources: 📓 Latest Senate Banking Committee Market Structure Draft📓 Latest Senate Agriculture Committee Market Structure Draft📄 SEC No-Action Letter to DTCC on Tokenization ServicesDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

In this episode, Jacob Robinson and Jonathan Schmalfeld break down the biggest U.S. crypto law and policy developments of the month, from the SEC’s moves toward bringing public markets on-chain to major CFTC moves on derivatives, prediction markets, and collateral. The conversation also covers crypto tax proposals, DeFi governance disputes, banking access, privacy, quantum risk, and why regulators increasingly view crypto not as an exception, but as core financial infrastructure.Jonathan Schmalfeld is the Policy Director at The Digital Chamber and the author of the Off the Blockchain+ newsletter, where he analyzes crypto regulation, market structure, and emerging policy trends.Timestamps:➡️ 1:03 — SEC market structure reforms and DTC no-action relief➡️ 7:54 — CFTC allows crypto and tokenized treasuries as collateral➡️ 8:45 — Prediction markets and state gambling laws➡️ 13:23 — Crypto tax proposals: wash sales, staking, and airdrops➡️ 16:03 — Aave, DAO governance, and token vs. equity conflicts➡️ 21:48 — GENIUS Act implementation and stablecoin interest debates➡️ 27:33 — The end of Operation Choke Point 2.0 and legislative fixes➡️ 31:02 — DeFi liquidations, market manipulation, and public debate➡️ 34:20 — Quantum computing risk and Bitcoin’s long-term resilience➡️ 38:46 — Michael Selig confirmed as CFTC ChairSponsor: This episode is brought to you by the Decentralization Research Center (DRC), a nonprofit think tank advocating for decentralization in emerging technologies. Learn more at thedrcenter.org.Resources: 📄 SEC’s No Action Letter to the DTC✉️ CFTC Digital Assets Pilot Program Announcement📓 Draft of the PARITY Act📄 FDIC Notice of Proposed Rulemaking for Stablecoins✉️ ⁠Jonathan’s Off the Blockchain+ Newsletter⁠Disclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

In this episode, Jacob Robinson speaks with Odun Olowookere about Canada’s proposed Stablecoin Act, the constitutional and regulatory challenges it raises, and why critics argue it may reduce clarity rather than enhance it. Odun Olowookere is a legal scholar at York University and the co-author of a submission to Canada’s House of Commons critiquing the draft Stablecoin Act, alongside Darrell Duffie of Stanford University and Andreas Veneris of the University of Toronto.Timestamps:➡️ 0:05 — Why Canada’s draft Stablecoin Act has drawn concern➡️ 2:13 — The Act’s stated goal: monetary sovereignty and dollarization risk➡️ 3:16 — Why stablecoins are not explicitly defined as payment instruments➡️ 5:20 — How Canada’s constitutional structure complicates stablecoin regulation➡️ 8:41 — Canada’s blanket prohibition on interest and how it differs from GENIUS➡️ 9:46 — Expanded “payment function” language and why it alarms critics➡️ 10:33 — How wallets, validators, and even users could be swept into regulation➡️ 16:14 — Data security obligations and the Bank of Canada’s technical capacity➡️ 18:33 — Prudential regulation concerns and undefined reserve requirements➡️ 21:48 — Is Canada regulating stablecoins too early?Sponsor: This episode is brought to you by the Decentralization Research Center (DRC), a nonprofit think tank advocating for decentralization in emerging technologies. Learn more at thedrcenter.org.Resources: 📓 The Canadian Stablecoin Act Draft Text📄 Odun, Andreas Veneris, and Darrell Duffie’s Written submission to the House of Commons in reply to The Stablecoin ActDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

DeFi has always promised trust without intermediaries, but as the ecosystem matures, that promise is being stress-tested by hacks, institutional risk limits, and regulatory pressure.To unpack whether DeFi can scale without sacrificing neutrality or permissionlessness, Katherine Kirkpatrick Bos, General Counsel of StarkWare, and Jessi Brooks, General Counsel & Chief Compliance Officer at Ribbit Capital, joined the podcast to discuss their paper “Trust Without Intermediaries: A Programmable Risk Management Framework for the Future.”The paper sparked controversy across the DeFi community, with critics arguing it could open the door to protocol-level compliance or re-intermediation. In this episode, Katherine and Jessi explain that the paper proposes something different.Timestamps: ➡️ 01:31 — Why write this paper?➡️ 07:55 — Institutional DeFi and why one-size-fits-all doesn’t work➡️ 09:43 — Compliance as a commercial choice, not a mandate➡️ 11:38 — Risk scoring in DeFi➡️ 15:37 — Technical de-risking➡️ 18:23 — Optional evolution➡️ 20:59 — Not protocol-level compliance➡️ 25:49 — Opt-in DeFi➡️ 30:44 — Lessons from the backlash and public debate& much more. Sponsor: : ⁠⁠ This episode is brought to you by ⁠⁠⁠Day One Law⁠, a boutique law firm helping crypto startups navigate complex legal challenges. Subscribe to ⁠⁠⁠Day One’s free monthly newsletter⁠⁠⁠ for legal and regulatory updates.Resources: 📄 Trust Without Intermediaries: A Programmable Risk Management Framework for the FutureDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

In this episode, Jonathan Schmalfeld and Jacob Robinson walk through the biggest crypto law and policy developments of the month of November. Jonathan is the Policy Director at The Digital Chamber, where he leads federal and state advocacy on digital asset regulation. Timestamps:➡️ 1:19 — Senate Agriculture Committee releases market structure draft➡️ 3:22 — Why DeFi and AML sections remain blank➡️ 3:52 — Chair Atkins’ speech and push for taxonomy➡️ 6:32 — Treasury & IRS guidance on staking ETFs➡️ 10:39 — Uniswap’s fee switch vote and winding down➡️ 13:53 — Coinbase reincorporates from Delaware to Texas➡️ 16:19 — MEV exploit trial ends in mistrial➡️ 23:36 — Samurai Wallet sentencing and liability risks➡️ 26:55 — DOJ’s Tornado Cash filing and self-custody issues➡️ 30:29 — Digital Chamber launches State Network➡️ 33:37 — OCC guidance allowing banks pay gas fees➡️ 36:50 — What to watch next in GENIUS implementationSponsor: Day One Law, a boutique corporate law firm founded by Nick Pullman. Nick and his team at Day One provide strategic legal counsel to startups, crypto projects, and Web3 innovators. ⁠You can get in contact with them via this link⁠: ⁠⁠https://www.dayonelaw.xyz/#contactDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Greg Xethalis, General Counsel at Multicoin Capital joins the podcast to discuss the history of ETFs, what we can learn from the first Bitcoin ETF, and the interplay between the CLARITY Act and RFIA.This episode also covers the challenges of disclosure in decentralized systems, and why principles-based regulation is essential for the next phase of crypto innovation.Timestamps➡️ 1:27 — The origin story of ETFs➡️ 3:00 — SEC dynamics behind the first ETF➡️ 7:45 — The first Bitcoin ETF ➡️ 15:34 — Market structure: CLARITY Act + RFIA as complementary frameworks➡️ 20:52 — Disclosure: a challenge in crypto regulation➡️ 33:34 — Who should be responsible for token disclosures long-term?Sponsor: This episode is brought to you by the Decentralization Research Center (DRC), a nonprofit think tank advocating for decentralization in emerging technologies. Learn more at thedrcenter.org.Resources: 📘 Project Crypto Speech — Chair Paul Atkins📄 FinCEN 2013 Virtual Currency Guidance📓 CLARITY Act – functional maturity framework📕 Responsible Financial Innovation Act (RFIA) – ancillary asset test🏛️ Greg's Senate Banking Committee testimonyDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

After the GENIUS Act was enacted, the U.S. Treasury issued an Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to gather public and industry input before drafting implementing regulations. Some of the most influential submissions came from major banking and traditional finance associations, outlining how they believe U.S. stablecoin regulation should look.J.W. Verret, Associate Professor of Law at the Antonin Scalia Law School at George Mason University, submitted a detailed rebuttal pushing back on the banks’ expansive interpretation of statutory authority and their call to ban “indirect yield.”Timestamps:➡️ 1:02 — Why this rulemaking matters➡️ 2:55 — Why JW felt compelled to respond➡️ 4:48 — How agencies use comments➡️ 5:17 — What counts as ‘interest’ or ‘yield’?➡️ 7:00 — The push to regulate affiliates and third-party providers➡️ 10:34 — Why a prohibition on ‘indirect yield’ matters➡️ 14:55 — Zcash, privacy tech, and Roman Storm➡️ 18:00 — What happens next in GENIUS rulemaking➡️ 19:11 — Do stablecoins drain bank deposits?Sponsor: Day One Law, a boutique corporate law firm founded by Nick Pullman. Nick and his team at Day One provide strategic legal counsel to startups, crypto projects, and Web3 innovators. ⁠You can get in contact with them via this link⁠: ⁠⁠https://www.dayonelaw.xyz/#contactResources: 📓 GENIUS Act📄 Joint Trades Letter (ABA + ICBA + BPI coalition)✉️ J.W. Verret’s Rebuttal LetterDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Staking is now officially on the table for U.S. crypto ETFs.In this episode, I’m joined by Jason Schwartz (@CryptoTaxGuyETH), a tax partner at CahillNXT, Cahill’s digital assets and emerging technology practice. Jason specializes in tax issues relating to digital assets, financial products, securitizations, lending, treaties, and fund structures.We break down Treasury and the IRS’s new safe harbor that allows crypto ETPs to stake without being treated as domestic corporations, and the questions that follow.Timestamps➡️ 00:00 — Intro➡️ 00:41 — Sponsor: Day One Law➡️ 01:04 — What does the new Treasury/IRS safe harbor actually allow?➡️ 03:30 — Why staking created a legal grey area for ETFs➡️ 06:18 — Why “grantor trust” classification matters so much➡️ 09:55 — The key safe harbor requirements➡️ 14:40 — Who this matters for: investors, issuers, and markets➡️ 19:22 — Could LST-based ETFs outperform Safe Harbor ETFs?➡️ 23:10 — Four big open questions: uncertainties the IRS didn’t settle➡️ 28:12 — What comes next for staking ETFs, Treasury, and IRS guidance& much more.Sponsor: Day One Law, a boutique corporate law firm founded by Nick Pullman. Nick and his team at Day One provide strategic legal counsel to startups, crypto projects, and Web3 innovators. ⁠You can get in contact with them via this link⁠: ⁠https://www.dayonelaw.xyz/#contactResources:📄 Cahill Client Alert: IRS and Treasury Issue Safe Harbor for Staking by Crypto ETPs🎧 Previous episode with Jason Schwartz (#151)🌐 CahillNXT💼 Jason on X: @CryptoTaxGuyETHDisclaimer: This podcast is for informational and educational purposes only and does not constitute legal or investment advice. Views expressed by the guest are their own and do not necessarily reflect those of their employers. Listening to this podcast does not create an attorney-client relationship.

In this episode, Jason Gottlieb, Chair of Morrison Cohen’s Digital Assets Department and White Collar & Regulatory Enforcement Practice Group, breaks down the litigation trends shaping crypto today.Timestamps:➡️ 0:44 — Why litigation is shifting from regulators to private disputes➡️ 3:37 — Statute of limitations: the five-year vs. ten-year reality➡️ 8:14 — Inside the revamped Morrison Cohen Crypto Litigation Tracker➡️ 12:41 — How judges are learning (and misunderstanding) crypto➡️ 18:03 — The importance of amicus briefs in crypto cases➡️ 20:52 — Stablecoin-freezing disputes and why issuers keep getting dragged in➡️ 26:41 — Jurisdiction battles: extraterritoriality, comity & serving by NFTSponsor: Day One Law, a boutique corporate law firm founded by Nick Pullman. Nick and his team at Day One provide strategic legal counsel to startups, crypto projects, and Web3 innovators. ⁠You can get in contact with them via this link⁠: https://www.dayonelaw.xyz/#contactResources: Morrison Cohen Crypto Litigation Tracker: cryptotracker.morrisoncohen.comDisclaimer: Jacob Robinson and his guests are not your lawyer. Nothing herein or mentioned on the Law of Code podcast should be construed as legal advice. The material published is intended for informational, educational, and entertainment purposes only. Please seek the advice of counsel, and do not apply any of the generalized material to your individual facts or circumstances without speaking to an attorney.

In this episode, Jacob is joined by DoubleZero’s General Counsel, Mari Tomunen, and Cooley’s Connor Tweardy to unpack the U.S. SEC’s Division of Corporation Finance’s landmark no-action letter to DoubleZero, a decentralized physical infrastructure (DePIN) project that became the first crypto initiative in over five years to secure such relief.Timestamps: ➡️ 01:20 – Why DoubleZero engaged with the SEC➡️ 03:00 – Communicating DePIN to regulators➡️ 04:40 – Making decentralization “lawyer-friendly” ➡️ 07:00 – Why the token's status was crucial➡️ 08:20 – Compliance by design➡️ 10:00 – The DoubleZero Foundation’s role➡️ 11:45 – How the SEC evaluated “managerial efforts” ➡️ 13:20 – How an international footprint shaped dialogue with regulators➡️ 15:30 – Lessons for other projects➡️ 18:00 – The SEC’s “efforts balancing” test➡️ 22:00 – Why discretionary control and passive income models raise red flags➡️ 26:00 – Designing compliance into your protocol➡️ 30:00 – Advice for teams pursuing regulatory claritySponsor: Day One Law. ⁠⁠ This episode is brought to you by ⁠⁠⁠Day One Law⁠, a boutique law firm helping crypto startups navigate complex legal challenges. Subscribe to ⁠⁠⁠Day One’s free monthly newsletter⁠⁠⁠ for legal and regulatory updates.Resources:No-Action Letter: https://www.sec.gov/files/corpfin/no-action/doublezero-final-conformed-092625.pdfCooley LLP's blog post: https://www.cooley.com/news/coverage/2025/2025-09-29-doublezero-secures-no-action-relief-from-secDisclaimer: The information in this podcast is provided for educational and informational purposes only and should not be construed as legal advice. Listening to this episode or contacting the guests does not create an attorney-client relationship. For advice regarding your specific situation, please consult your own legal counsel.