The First Attempt
Previously, Warren promised to resubmit the Digital Assets Anti-Money Laundering Act, a measure that failed when she initially sponsored it alongside Kansas Senator Roger Marshall in the fourth quarter of 2022.
Although the claimed proposal clearly stated that its major goal is to protect Americans from scams, it was also noted that it wanted to force cryptocurrency businesses overseas and weaken consumer choice. This is because it forbids the use of digital asset mixers and requires self-hosted wallets, as well as miners and validators, to have anti-money laundering procedures.
Warren’s Bills Focuses On. . .
The bill is believed to be particularly tough on DeFi, requiring the platforms to record users’ personal information and send it to the authorities without a warrant or reasonable cause. This legislation would also classify all miners as money service enterprises.
Furthermore, it would disregard the reality that miners can supply non-transactional services. The law would also require software developers to register as money service providers, implement anti-money laundering procedures, and report customers to the Financial Crimes Enforcement Network.
The proposed plan is rated “wrong,” but it may appear correct because of the timely nature of recent high-profile frauds and thefts, which illustrate the necessity for some crypto laws and enforcement. According to reports, Warren’s bill is a smear campaign against the business that would increase Americans’ reliance on traditional banks.
Warren was incorrect when she stated that cryptocurrency is “the preferred means of payment for international drug traffickers and terrorists.” This is demonstrated by the fact that only roughly $10 billion or less in cryptocurrency is involved in money laundering each year, which is significantly less than the $800 billion to $2 trillion laundered in traditional currencies.
The primary unintended consequence of Warren’s bill is that it has caused many bitcoin businesses to close or leave the United States. If this occurs, Americans will have fewer legal avenues to participate in the sector. The measure might also decrease competition in banking and other financial services, benefiting conventional providers who are not subject to the same scrutiny.