The Crypto Task Force held a press conference in early February 2025. It struck the wrong tone. While the task force gave lip service to regulatory clarity, the goal seemed to placate the crypto industry, not bring about change that empowers individuals.
On Jan. 23, the president established a working group for digital assets to propose a federal regulatory framework around issuing and operating digital assets, including stablecoins and a Bitcoin reserve. These goals must be expanded upon, and it seems they are, as the development of a strategic reserve is now underway.
Instead of perpetuating the same discussion on “regulatory clarity” that the industry has been having with officials for years, the task force should take a similar approach to crypto matters as the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE), which has been working in feverish haste to cut federal agencies and programs that it has deemed wasteful.
What the force should do
Instead, the Crypto Task Force should expose the perils of central bank inflationary money that puts humanity on a neverending treadmill toward desperation. It should cultivate a spirit of competition and adopting decentralized, permissionless currencies.
The Task Force should persuade lawmakers to adopt a laissez-faire crypto structure while effectively stamping out the rampant fraud by the truly bad actors who exploit people’s false hopes of quick riches. The Crypto Task Force should put out press releases warning people about obvious scams. It should also teach people the virtues of proof-of-work and the follies of many proof-of-stake coins.
The goal of Trump’s crypto task force should be simple: Establish a freedom-focused growth trajectory for the crypto industry in the US without delay.
The freedom age
Trump has clarified that he wants to promote the responsible growth and use of crypto. Such recommendations only hold as much merit as they grant entrepreneurs the freedom to take risks and curtail massive corporations from rolling out a digital panopticon with centralized cryptocurrencies.
If the US is to be competitive with countries like the United Arab Emirates, the US must create a regulatory sandbox that enables founders to develop technology — including controversial technologies like decentralized coin mixers — in legal gray areas without the fear of prison or jail time so long as they are not blatantly breaking pre-existing law.
It’s time to let the market decide
Before Trump was elected, US crypto founders contended with seemingly arbitrary Securities and Exchange Commission witch hunts, which have ensnared even the most respected crypto institutions, such as Coinbase and Kraken.
The SEC went after Ripple for issuing an alleged unregistered security, but Ripple enjoyed significant wins in that case, especially when selling tokens to institutions. Countless founders have been de-banked in the US for having founded even crypto-adjacent companies. That suggests there has been an all-out war by Washington and big banks against the industry. That has to end, and the damage that has been done must be repaired. The Crypto Task Force cannot protect big banks against crypto. It must let the market decide.
Although many suits have been dropped, lawmakers have their work cut out for them. So much has changed since the 20th century, when the US was a world leader in the development of the internet. It has fallen far behind in crypto.
What the US needs now is innovation, not crypto red tape. The world has Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Know Your Customer (KYC) laws. The Crypto Task Force mustn’t waste time developing a separate set of AML and KYC laws. Instead of studying the feasibility of a Bitcoin reserve, just put the Bitcoin confiscated from Ross Ulbricht, founder of the Silk Road, under the management of the Treasury and call it a day instead of selling it.
The Crypto Task Force must work now to build a renewed spirit of technological innovation in the United States. Countries in Asia have demonstrated a higher level of participation at the retail level. The US needs a strategy to educate and empower the retail investing public to partake in exciting and new markets like blockchain and AI. The US must switch from a conservative approach to crypto toward a progressive approach akin to what we’ve seen in the UAE.
The US has already suffered a brain drain, as entrepreneurs have left to pursue opportunities in friendlier jurisdictions. If the US had developed a welcoming Bitcoin approach, El Salvador could have never attracted talent from the US.
Too much freedom has already been lost in the US. The Trump administration must unleash the crypto-anarchists with the enthusiasm of DOGE in the spirit of some of the US’s greatest freedom thinkers, like Henry David Thoreau and others.
Long ago, the US fell behind in the crypto arm’s race. It will take work to catch up, and the more radical the approach taken by the Crypto Task Force, the quicker the gap can be closed.
If it doesn’t, you can bet we crypto-anarchists will be storming the gates.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.
They demolished most of the “blue wall” at the general election, and now the Lib Dems are eyeing up Labour voters.
Strategists see an opportunity in younger people who, over the course of this parliament, may be priced out of cities and into commuter belt areas as they seek to get on the housing ladder or start a family.
Insiders say the plan is to focus more on the cost of living to shift the party’s appeal beyond the traditional southern heartlands.
“There’s a key opportunity to target people who were 30 at the last election who over the next five years might find themselves moving out of London, to areas like Surrey, Guildford,” a senior party source told Sky News.
“We also need to be better at making a case for a liberal voice in urban areas. We have not told enough of a story on the cost of living.
“We need a liberal voice back in the cities – areas like Liverpool, where there is strong support at a council level that we can use as a base to build on.”
Liverpool is a traditional Labour heartland but in January lost its first local authority by-election there in 27 years to the Lib Dems.
More on Liberal Democrats
Related Topics:
Carl Cashman, the leader of the Lib Dems on the city council, says it’s a result that shows the potential to make gains in areas where the party came third and fourth at the general election.
Image: Carl Cashman is the leader of the Liverpool Liberal Democrats
“One of the cases I have been making to the national party is that Liverpool should be a number one target.
“We are almost at the end of the road when it comes to the Conservatives, so we need to start looking at areas like Liverpool,” he said, adding that Manchester, Sheffield and Newcastle could also be ripe for the taking.
However, the party faces a challenge of making a case for liberalism against the rising tide of populism.
Sir Ed Davey, the party leader, is trying to position himself as the only politician who is not afraid of holding Reform UK leader Nigel Farage to account.
He has recently unveiled a plan to cut energy bills by changing how renewable projects are paid for and says he will boycott Donald Trump’s state dinner. It is these green, internationalist policies that insiders hope can hoover up support of remaining Tory moderates unhappy with the direction of Kemi Badenoch’s party and progressive voters who think Labour is more of the same.
However, strategists admit it is difficult to cut through on these issues in a changing media landscape, “when you’re either viral or you’re not”.
‘Silly stunts’ here to stay
Farage has no such problem, which Davey has blamed on a national media weighted too heavily in favour of the Reform UK leader, given the size of his party (he has just four MPs compared to the Liberal Democrats’ 72).
But the two parties have very different media strategies. This week, on the same day Farage held a Trump-style press conference to announce his immigration deportation plans, with a Q&A for journalists after, the Liberal Democrat leader went to pick strawberries in Somerset to highlight the plight of farmers facing increased inheritance tax.
Image: Sir Ed Davey takes part in strawberry picking with Tessa Munt, the MP for Wells & Mendip Hills. Pic: PA
Some Lib Dems have questioned whether the “silly stunts” that proved successful during the general election are past their shelf life, but strategists say there will be no fundamental change to that, insisting Sir Ed is the “genuine nice guy” he comes across as and that offers something different.
The Lib Dems ultimately see their strength as lying not in the “airwaves war” but the “ground war” – building support on the doorstep at a local level and then turning that into seats.
“Our strategy is seats, not votes. Theirs is votes, not seats,” said the party source, suggesting Farage’s divisiveness might backfire under a first past the post system where people typically vote against the party they disklike the most.
“The next election won’t be about who is saying the meanest things.”
‘Don’t underestimate us’
There is broad support within the party behind that strategy. Cllr Cashman said a greater use of social media could help attract a younger demographic, along with putting forward “really fundamental, powerful liberal ideas” on issues such as housing.
But he said Davey is “never going to do the controversial things Farage does”.
“The way we reach people, the traditional campaigning, is what makes us strong. Just because we are not always on the airwaves, do not underestimate us.”
Image: Reform UK leader Nigel Farage. Pic: PA
For Liberal Democrat peer and pollster Dr Mark Pack, there are reasons to be confident. On Friday, the party won a local council by-election in Camden, north London – “Sir Keir Starmer’s backyard” – with a swing from Labour to the Lib Dems of 19%.
It is these statistics that the party is far more focused on than national vote share – with Labour’s misfortunes opening an opportunity to strategically target areas where voters are more likely to switch.
“One of the lessons we have learned from the past is that riding high in opinion polls doesn’t translate into seats.
“We are really focused on winning seats with the system in front of us. There is a route to success by concentrating on and expanding on what we have been good at.”
Deputy Prime Minister Angela Rayner should face an ethics inquiry over her tax affairs, the Conservatives have said.
It comes after The Daily Telegraph claimed Ms Rayner, who is also housing secretary, avoided £40,000 in stamp duty on a second home in East Sussex by removing her name from the deeds of another property in Greater Manchester.
Stamp duty is a tax paid in England and Northern Ireland when someone buys a property over a certain price.
The newspaper also claimed Ms Rayner previously suggested the Greater Manchester home remained her primary residence, saving around £2,000 in council tax on her grace and favour home in central London.
Conservative chairman Kevin Hollinrake has written to the independent adviser on ministerial standards, Sir Laurie Magnus, requesting he investigate whether Ms Rayner broke ministerial rules.
In a letter to Sir Laurie, Mr Hollinrake described Ms Rayner’s arrangements as “hypocritical tax avoidance, by a minister who supports higher taxes on family homes, high-value homes and second homes”.
As housing secretary, Ms Rayner is responsible for overseeing council tax and housing policy.
Mr Hollinrake said the statements she had given on her residency were “contradictory”, but conceded she had broken no laws.
A spokesperson for Ms Rayner has said she “paid the correct duty” on the purchase “entirely properly” – and “any suggestion otherwise is entirely without basis”.
A Cabinet Office spokesman added that Ms Rayner “has followed advice on the allocation of her official residence at all times”.