The definition of the term “broker” includes individuals or entities that regularly provide services to carry out digital asset transfers. This definition ensures that only those truly “in a position to know” transaction details are subject to Form 1099-DA reporting requirements.
These US Internal Revenue Service rules are built on prior rulemaking (T.D. 10000) from July 2024 and focus on extending broker reporting obligations to decentralized finance (DeFi), which involves digital asset transactions without a traditional intermediary.
T.D. 10021 introduces the term “digital asset middleman,” which the IRS previously delayed due to its complexity and controversy.
The broker reporting mandate originates from the 2021 Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, also known as the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law. It expanded existing broker reporting obligations under Sections 6045 and 6045A to include digital assets. The provision is projected to generate nearly $28 billion in revenue over a decade.
Entities classified as brokers include:
Digital asset exchanges: Both custodial and non-custodial platforms that execute trades.
Hosted wallet providers: Those managing wallets and verifying user identities.
Digital asset kiosks: Bitcoin ATMs and other physical kiosks dealing in cryptocurrencies.
DeFi brokers: Only front-end service providers, such as token swap interfaces, are considered brokers. Activities like liquidity provision, staking and lending remain exempt from reporting requirements.
Providers of “unhosted” wallets, where users retain full control over their private keys, are generally exempt unless they function similarly to an exchange.
The definition of a digital asset broker has been highly debated after the enactment of the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act in November 2021.
How the IRS expands the definition of “broker” in digital asset transactions
The Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act (Public Law 117-58), specifically Section 80603, broadened the definition of “broker” under Internal Revenue Code Section 6045 to include those facilitating digital asset transfers.
Internal Revenue Service regulations broadly define brokers as entities engaged in digital asset sales or exchanges. Here is a timeline of the regulations:
Custodial brokers include operators of custodial digital asset trading platforms, such as centralized exchanges (CEXs) that hold customers’ private keys. It extends to hosted wallet providers, digital asset kiosks (e.g., Bitcoin ATMs) and certain processors of digital asset payments, such as crypto payment processors. These entities must report because they have custody, making it feasible to track transactions.
The IRS’s December 2024 regulations focus on trading front-end service providers in the DeFi ecosystem, such as interfaces that connect users to decentralized exchanges (DEXs). The Treasury and IRS use a three-part model (interface, application, settlement layers) to identify DeFi participants, focusing on those with sufficient control or influence, aligning with Financial Action Task Force (FATF) guidance.
However, as DeFi platforms lack centralized control, there were concerns about privacy and compliance.
Efforts to repeal the IRS broker rule
In March 2025, discussions on repealing the DeFi broker rules intensified, with the Senate voting 70–27 on March 4 and the House voting 292–132 on March 11, to repeal the DeFi broker rules under the Congressional Review Act (CRA), as detailed in House Vote on Repeal.
President Donald Trump has signaled support, with his crypto czar, David Sacks, affirming the administration’s backing to the repeal. If signed, this repeal would permanently bar the IRS from implementing similar regulations, significantly impacting DeFi reporting.
With bipartisan support, including 76 Democrats joining Republicans in the House vote, this reflects broader political shifts toward supporting crypto innovation, especially under President Trump’s pro-crypto stance, as seen in his executive order for a national crypto stockpile.
Did you know? Five draft Forms 1099-DA and three draft Final Instruction versions preceded the finalized IRS crypto broker rules. On Jan. 8, 2025, the IRS issued updated 2025 General Instructions for Certain Information Returns, which included instructions for Form 1099-DA.
What is Form 1099-DA? The new crypto tax form for 2025
Form 1099-DA, titled “Digital Asset Proceeds from Broker Transactions,” is a new tax form introduced by the IRS to standardize the reporting of digital asset transactions, such as those involving cryptocurrencies. It was released on Dec. 5, 2024.
It’s designed to help taxpayers accurately report their gains or losses from selling or exchanging digital assets and to ensure the IRS can track this income more effectively. Think of it as a specialized version of other 1099 forms — like the 1099-B used for stocks — but tailored for the unique world of crypto and other blockchain-based assets.
The form requires “brokers” (like crypto exchanges or platforms) to report specific details about your digital asset sales or exchanges to both you and the IRS. For transactions in 2025, brokers must report:
Customers’ name, address and Taxpayer Identification Number (TIN)
The date and time of each transaction
The amount and type of digital asset sold (e.g., Bitcoin, Ether), including a unique nine-digit code from the Digital Token Identification Foundation (DTIF) to identify it
The gross proceeds (the total amount customers received in US dollars) from the sale.
Along with the crypto brokers, if you (i.e., a taxpayer resident in the US) sell or swap crypto through a broker, you’ll get a Form 1099-DA to use when filing your taxes. You’re still responsible for reporting all taxable crypto events, even if no form is issued (e.g., for trades on non-reporting platforms).
Key dates include:
Gross proceeds reporting: Begins for transactions on or after Jan. 1, 2025, with reports due in early 2026. This means you’ll receive your first Form 1099-DA for 2025 trades, due to you by Jan. 31, 2026, and to the IRS by Feb. 28 (or March 31 if filed electronically).
Basis reporting: Starts for transactions on or after Jan. 1, 2026, including cost basis and gain/loss character for certain brokers.
Why is this new form required?
Before Form 1099-DA, crypto tax reporting was a mess. Some exchanges issued Forms 1099-MISC or 1099-B, while others provided nothing, leaving taxpayers to manually track their trades. This inconsistency made it hard for people to report accurately and for the IRS to verify income. Thus, it’s part of a broader push to close the tax gap and bring crypto in line with traditional financial reporting.
Did you know? Unlike stock reporting, where Form 1099-B covers everything cleanly, crypto’s decentralized nature and lack of universal identifiers posed challenges. Form 1099-DA tackles this with the DTIF code and a focus on digital assets — defined as any blockchain-recorded value, like cryptocurrencies or non-fungible tokens (NFTs), but not cash.
How Form 1099-DA shifts crypto reporting
On Jan. 10, 2025, the IRS released the final version of Form 1099-DA, titled “Digital Asset Proceeds From Broker Transactions.” Brokers have been instructed to use this form to report specific digital asset transactions occurring from 2025 onward.
Herein are the key highlights of the new Form 1099-DA and its implications:
Transition rule for tokenized securities
Digital assets previously reported under Form 1099-B, such as tokenized securities, must now shift to Form 1099-DA. For instance, sales of tokenized stocks or bonds should be reported on Form 1099-DA instead of Form 1099-B.
However, a transitional rule for 2025 allows brokers to report cash sales of tokenized securities on either Form 1099-B or Form 1099-DA. This flexibility gives traditional brokers — who may not typically handle digital assets — extra time to update their systems for full compliance by 2026, as outlined in Treasury Decision 10000.
Exception in tokenized securities rule
An exception to the general rule applies to tokenized securities settled or cleared on a Limited-Access Regulated Network (LARN). These transactions must be reported on Form 1099-B, not Form 1099-DA.
If a LARN loses its regulated status, brokers can continue using Form 1099-B for affected transactions through the end of that calendar year, ensuring consistency during regulatory shifts.
Customer-provided acquisition information
Form 1099-DA includes a new checkbox (Box 8) that brokers must mark if they relied on customer-provided acquisition information to calculate the basis.
This ties to final regulations allowing brokers to use such data for specific identification — pinpointing what units were sold or transferred — and requires them to disclose its use. This change, per Treasury Decision 10021, helps taxpayers align their records with broker reports.
Did you know? According to the 2025 General Instructions, Form 1099-DA electronic filing is required through the Information Reporting Intake System (IRIS), and Filing Information Returns Electronically System (FIRE) is not an option.
Noncovered status
Like Form 1099-B, Form 1099-DA requires brokers to indicate in Box 9 if a digital asset is a “noncovered security,” meaning its basis isn’t reported to the IRS.
Unlike earlier drafts, the updated form no longer requires an explanation in Box 10 for this status — Box 10 is now reserved for future use. This simplifies reporting for assets acquired before basis tracking rules apply (e.g., pre-2026 purchases).
Number of decimal places
Brokers were earlier required to report the number of units of digital assets sold and transferred up to 10 decimal places. This requirement has been extended to 18 decimal places, reflecting the precision necessary in reporting digital asset transactions.
Proceeds clarification
Total proceeds from the digital asset transaction should exclude gross proceeds from the initial sale of a specified non-fungible token (NFT) created or minted by the recipient. These amounts are instead reported separately in Box 11c, distinguishing creator earnings from secondary sales, per updated instructions.
Transfer date
Box 12b records the date digital assets were transferred into a custodial account. The final instructions specify that this box should be left blank if the digital assets were transferred on various dates, accommodating scenarios where multiple transfers occur.
Qualifying stablecoins and specified NFTs
Optional reporting for sales of qualifying stablecoins and specified NFTs comes with specific instructions. For specified NFTs, brokers enter code “999999999” in Box 1a and “Specified NFTs” in Box 1b. This ensures unique assets, like rare digital collectibles, are tracked distinctly from cryptocurrencies or stablecoins.
Applicable checkbox on Form 8949
Brokers must use new codes — G, H, J, K and Y — on Form 1099-DA to match the recipient’s Form 8949 (Sales and Other Dispositions of Capital Assets) for the tax year. These codes help taxpayers correctly categorize gains or losses, linking broker reports to tax filings seamlessly.
Did you know? If asset sales remain unspecified, the IRS will apply first-in, first-out, which might lead to the taxpayer paying higher taxes.
How IRS crypto broker rules affect taxpayers
The IRS rolled out new cryptocurrency tax reporting rules effective Jan. 1, 2025, targeting brokers and investors with stricter record-keeping and reporting requirements. These changes aim to boost tax compliance and ensure digital asset transactions are reported accurately, bringing crypto in line with traditional financial assets.
Here’s what’s new and what it means for you.
Cost basis tracking per account: Under the updated rules, crypto investors must now track their cost basis — the original purchase price — separately for each account or wallet, ditching the old universal tracking approach. For every transaction, you’ll need to record the purchase date, acquisition cost and specific details, like the wallet it’s tied to. Starting in 2025, brokers — like centralized exchanges — must report these transactions to the IRS using Form 1099-DA, mirroring how banks report stock trades. This shift, detailed in Treasury Decision 10000 (June 2024), closes loopholes by tying gains to specific accounts, making it harder to obscure taxable events.
Specific identification required for transactions: The new regulations require taxpayers to use specific identification for each digital asset sale, pinpointing the exact purchase date, amount and cost of the asset sold. If you don’t provide this, the IRS defaults to the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method — selling your oldest coins first — which could inflate taxable gains if early purchases had lower costs. Previously, many investors averaged their cost basis across all holdings, a simpler but less precise method. This change, effective in 2025, demands detailed records to avoid unexpected tax bills.
Temporary safe harbor: To ease the switch, the IRS offers a temporary safe harbor under Revenue Procedure 2024-28. If you’ve been using a universal cost basis method, you have until Dec. 31, 2025, to reallocate your basis across accounts or wallets accurately. This one-time grace period lets you adjust records without penalty, but you’ll need to act fast — brokers won’t report basis until 2026 transactions, so 2025 is on you to get it right.
Penalties for noncompliance: Messing up these rules comes with a cost. The IRS has upped the stakes for 2025, increasing fines for underreporting crypto income, adding interest on unpaid taxes, and ramping up audits for mismatched gains and losses. Notice 2024-56 provides penalty relief for brokers making a good faith effort in 2025, but taxpayers don’t get the same leniency — noncompliance could trigger scrutiny, especially with Form 1099-DA giving the IRS clearer data to cross-check.
Notably, the IRS’s updated crypto broker rules also affect non-domiciled taxpayers — those living outside the US but subject to IRS reporting — by mandating detailed cost basis tracking for each account and specific identification of digital asset sales on Form 1099-DA, regardless of where they reside.
For example, a US citizen in Europe or a foreign national with US-based crypto income must now maintain precise records of purchase dates and costs per wallet, facing increased compliance efforts and potential tax obligations on US-sourced gains.
From tracking cost basis per account to facing steeper penalties, these changes aim to align crypto with traditional finance, offering a brief safe harbor to adapt but signaling a clear shift: Compliance is no longer optional, and the tax net now stretches globally, leaving little room for oversight as the crypto landscape matures.
Sir Ed Davey has branded Elon Musk a criminal and called for him to be prosecuted for “allowing online harm to children” on his social media platform X.
The Lib Dem leader told Sky News’ Sunday Morning with Trevor Phillips the billionaire owner of X, formerly Twitter, is “inciting violence” and his social media platform is actively failing to protect children.
Sir Ed, speaking from the Lib Dem conference in Bournemouth, said Mr Musk could be prosecuted under the Online Safety Act, under which social media companies have a legal duty to protect children from harmful content and their directors are liable for criminal prosecution for breaching it.
Image: Elon Musk. Pic: Reuters
Asked if he is calling Mr Musk a criminal, Sir Ed did not miss a beat as he said: “Yes.
“Not just because of the awful things he’s done in inciting violence, and, for example, he says a civil war in our country is inevitable, that our democratically elected government should be overthrown.
“They were bad enough. But on his platform, they’re examples of adverse, pushing people on self-harm, on grooming, even selling videos showing paedophile acts, of child sex abuse acts and I think he should be held to account for them, him personally and his business.
“Ofcom now has the powers under the Online Safety Act.”
More on Elon Musk
Related Topics:
He said if Mr Musk comes to the UK, he should be arrested.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
0:38
Sir Ed Davey enters conference with marching band
Mr Musk was accused of inciting violence during a march organised by Tommy Robinson in London last week.
He told the protest via video link: “This is a message to the reasonable centre, the people who ordinarily wouldn’t get involved in politics, who just want to live their lives. They don’t want that, they’re quiet, they just go about their business.
“My message is to them: if this continues, that violence is going to come to you, you will have no choice. You’re in a fundamental situation here.
“Whether you choose violence or not, violence is coming to you. You either fight back or you die, that’s the truth, I think.”
Image: Sir Ed Davey said Elon Musk should be arrested
Sir Ed said it is “shocking” that Mr Musk removed some of X’s child safety teams when he took over Twitter in 2022 and accused him of just being “interested in his bank account”.
“I’m interested in the safety of our children, and it is quite wrong that his business puts on these adverts,” said the Lib Dem leader.
“It’s disgusting and I hope everybody will agree with me and the Liberal Democrats that we should take really strong action against him.”
After Mr Musk acquired Twitter, many of its child safety staff were laid off or resigned, and the platform’s trust and safety council was disbanded.
Child protection experts have accused Mr Musk of leading a “race to the bottom on safety”.
Image: Elon Musk with Donald Trump in the Oval Office. Pic: AP
Ofcom, the UK’s independent media regulator, which has the power to prosecute directors of social media platforms under the Online Safety Act, has launched an investigation into X’s handling of child sexual abuse content.
This is not the first time Sir Ed has hit out at the world’s richest man, as he called for the US ambassador to be summoned in February “to ask why an incoming US official is suggesting the UK government should be overthrown”.
The prime minister had called on Benjamin Netanyahu’s government to take substantive steps to end the “appalling situation in Gaza“, agree to a ceasefire, commit to a long-term sustainable peace, allow the UN to restart the supply of aid, and not annex the West Bank.
The Israeli foreign ministry furiously rejected his statement, with Mr Netanyahu claiming that “Starmer rewards Hamas‘s monstrous terrorism and punishes its victims”.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
1:28
Could recognition of Palestine change the West Bank?
Ilay David, brother of Hamas hostage Evyatar David, who was seen emaciated in a video last month, said giving recognition was “like saying to Hamas: ‘It is OK, you can keep starving the hostages, you can keep using them as human shields.’
“This kind of recognition gives Hamas power to be stubborn in negotiations. That is the last thing we need right now.”
There has been no ceasefire, and the situation in Gaza has deteriorated, with a declaration of a famine in Gaza City and the expansion of Israeli military operations.
Israel has launched a major ground offensive to seize all of Gaza City and destroy Hamas in an operation which has prompted widespread condemnation, with UK Foreign Secretary Yvette Cooper calling it “utterly reckless and appalling”.
More on Gaza
Related Topics:
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
15:16
What changed in UK’s Gaza policy?
Earlier this month, a UN commission of inquiry concluded that Israel has committed genocide against Palestinians in Gaza. Israel said the claim was “distorted and false”.
The UK will join 147 of the 193 members of the UN who recognise Palestine ahead of the UN General Assembly in New York on Monday.
Other nations, including France, Australia and Canada, have said they plan to take the same step at the UN gathering as part of a broad international effort to put pressure on Israel.
And the Muslim Council of Britain welcomed the prime minister’s move, but urged that recognition must also come with “tangible action”.
During a joint news conference with the prime minister at Chequers on Thursday, Donald Trump said he disagreed with recognition, and US politicians have urged the UK and other allies to reverse their stance.
Image: Sir Keir Starmer is expected to formally announce the move on Sunday. Pic: PA
Sky News understands that Israel is considering options in response to the UK’s decision, but the strength of that reaction is still under consideration.
Family members of some of the 48 hostages still in captivity, after Hamas and other militant groups stormed into Israel on 7 October 2023, have written an open letter to Sir Keir, condemning the move.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:38
Israel ramps up attacks on Gaza City
“Hamas has already celebrated the UK’s decision as a victory and reneged on a ceasefire deal,” they said.
“We write to you with a simple plea – do not take this step until our loved ones are home and in our arms.”
Meanwhile shadow foreign secretary Dame Priti Patel accused the prime minister of “capitulating” to his backbenchers to shore up his leadership.
“With the terrorist organisation Hamas still holding hostages in barbaric conditions and glorifying acts of terror, Starmer is sending a dangerous message, where violence and extremism are tolerated and rewarded,” she said.
The UK government is understood to be looking at further sanctions on Hamas, and has demanded the group release all hostages, agree to an immediate ceasefire, accept it will have no role in governing Gaza, and commit to disarmament.
The controversial assisted dying bill is still very much alive, having received a second reading in the House of Lords without a vote.
But that doesn’t tell the whole story. Day two of debate on the bill in the Lords was just as passionate and emotional as the first, a week earlier.
And now comes the hard part for supporters of Labour MP Kim Leadbeater’s Terminally Ill Adults (End of Life) Bill, as opponents attempt to make major changes in the months ahead.
The Lords’ chamber was again packed for the debate, which this time began at 10am and lasted nearly six hours. In all, during 13 hours of debate over two days, nearly 200 peers spoke.
According to one estimate, over both days of the debate only around 50 peers spoke in favour of the bill and considerably more than 100 against, with only a handful neutral.
The bill proposes allowing terminally ill adults in England and Wales with fewer than six months to live to apply for an assisted death. Scotland’s parliament has already passed a similar law.
Image: Pro-assisted dying campaigners outside parliament earlier this month. Pic: PA
In a safeguard introduced in the Commons, an application would have to be approved by two doctors and a panel featuring a social worker, senior lawyer and psychiatrist.
The bill’s sponsor in the Lords, Charlie Falconer, said while peers have “a job of work to do”, elected MPs in the Commons should have the final decision on the bill, not unelected peers.
One of the most contentious moments in the first day of debate last Friday was a powerful speech by former Tory prime minister Theresa May, who said the legislation was a “licence to kill” bill.
That claim prompted angry attacks on the former PM when the debate resumed from Labour peers, who said it had left them dismayed and caused distress to many terminally ill people.
The former PM, daughter of a church of England vicar, had claimed in her speech that the proposed law was an “assisted suicide bill” and “effectively says suicide is OK”.
But opening the second day’s debate, Baroness Thornton, a lay preacher and health minister in Tony Blair’s government, said: “People have written to me in the last week, very distressed.
“They say things such as: ‘We are not suicidal – we want to live – but we are dying, and we do not have the choice or ability to change that. Assisted dying is not suicide’.”
Throughout the criticism of her strong opposition to the bill, the former PM sat rooted to her seat, not reacting visibly but looking furious as her critics attacked her.
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
3:06
Assisted Dying: Reflections at the end of life
There was opposition to the bill, too, from grandees of the Thatcher and Major cabinets. Lord Deben, formerly John Gummer and an ex-member of the Church of England synod, said the bill “empowers the state to kill”.
And Lord Chris Patten, former Tory chairman, Hong Kong governor and Oxford University chancellor, said it was an “unholy legislative mess” and could lead to death becoming the “default solution to perceived suffering”.
Day two of the debate also saw an unholy clash between Church of England bishops past and present, with former Archbishop of Canterbury George Carey claiming opponents led by Archbishop of York Stephen Cottrell were out of touch with public opinion.
While a large group of bishops sat in their full robes on their benches, Lord Carey suggested both the Church and the Lords would “risk our legitimacy by claiming that we know better than both the public” and the Commons.
“Do we really want to stand in the way of this bill?” he challenged peers. “It will pass, whether in this session or the next. It has commanding support from the British public and passed the elected House after an unprecedented period of scrutiny.”
But Archbishop Cottrell hit back, declaring he was confident he represented “views held by many, not just Christian leaders, but faith leaders across our nation in whom I’ve been in discussion and written to me”.
And he said the bill was wrong “because it ruptures relationships” and would “turbocharge” the agonising choices facing poor and vulnerable people.
Image: A campaigner in opposition of the bill. Pic: PA
One of the most powerful speeches came from former Tory MP Craig Mackinlay, awarded a peerage by Rishi Sunak after a dramatic Commons comeback after losing his arms and legs after a bout of sepsis.
He shocked peers by revealing that in Belgium, terminally ill children as young as nine had been euthanised. “I’m concerned we want to embed an option for death in the NHS when its modus operandi should be for life,” he said.
And appearing via video link, a self-confessed “severely disabled” Tory peer, Kevin Shinkwin, was listened to in a stunned silence as he said the legislation amounted to the “stuff of nightmares”.
He said it would give the state “a licence to kill the wrong type of people”, adding: “I’m the wrong type. This bill effectively puts a price on my head.”
Please use Chrome browser for a more accessible video player
2:09
Assisted Dying vote: Both sides react
After the debate, Labour peer and former MP Baroness Luciana Berger, an opponent of the bill, claimed a victory after peers accepted her proposal to introduce a special committee to examine the bill and report by 7 November.
“The introduction of a select committee is a victory for those of us that want proper scrutiny of how these new laws would work, the massive changes they could make to the NHSand how we treat people at the end of their lives,” she told Sky News.
“It’s essential that as we look at these new laws we get a chance to hear from those government ministers and professionals that would be in charge of creating and running any new assisted dying system.”
After the select committee reports, at least four sitting Fridays in the Lords have been set aside for all peers – a Committee of the whole house – to debate the bill and propose amendments.
Report stage and third reading will follow early next year, then the bill goes back to the Commons for debate on any Lords amendments. There’s then every chance of parliamentary ping pong between the two Houses.
Kim Leadbeater’s bill may have cleared an important hurdle in the Lords. But there’s still a long way to go – and no doubt a fierce battle ahead – before it becomes law.