Crypto giants seek Congress Clarity about the rules of American money channels

The Defi Education Fund and the leading crypto companies have called on the US Department of Justice for its “unprecedented and overly extensive” interpretation of the Criminal Code that has been used to define crypto companies as illegal money channels.

In a letter today signed and addressed to leaders of the home and senate committees for banking and judiciary, and the House Committee on Financial Services, the Defi Education Fund said that the function of DOJ, which first appeared in 2023, is “the viability of American software development in the digital Activale industry and other industry.”

The letter was signed by 34 companies, foundations and associations in the Crypto industry, including the Coinbase, Kraken and Crypto.com fairs, as well as VC companies Andreessen Horowitz, Paradigm and Dragonfly. The list continues with Uniswap Labs, Polygon Labs and Consensys (one of the 22 investors in an editorial independent Decrypt), among others.

“The number one policy priority of the Defi -Education Fund is to obtain Congress Clarity in section 1960,” who has been abused by the DOJ to “make regulations by criminal indictment,” said Amanda Tuminelli, Defi Education fund Executive Director and Chief Legal Officer, said said Decrypt.

One of the most timely examples of the definition of the “money channel” used by the Doj is the current Persecution of Tornado Cash co-founder Roman Storm. He was arrested on money laundering.

In the case, the DOJ has underlined the use of Tornado Cash through the state as a threat sponsored by the state, while crypto proponents such as the Def have gathered around Storm and saying that the code he wrote is protected under freedom of expression. But judge Katherine Polk Faila ruled that the case would take place because of the articles of association under which storms were charged.

“These laws are not aimed at protected expressive behavior,” said Faila of the laws that Storm would have violated when launching and maintaining Tornado -Contant Money. “They punish money laundering, […] the operation of a money without a license, and […] Sanctions discharge. “

Def wrote that in his letter Section 1960 is one of the two pieces of our legal code that defines a ‘money -shipping company’. It is designed to be the “enforcement mechanism” that criminalizes a money without a permit, says the letter. In Section 5330Where the definition of “WHO” should be given a permit as a money -shipping company, the definition is “substantively identical” compared to section 1960, the def.

“Despite the intentional parable in definitions of ‘Money Shipping of Affairs’ in both section 5330 and section 1960, and despite the supervision of FINCEN 2019, the Doj has taken the position that the definition of a ‘money sends under the cases’ under the [Bank Secrecy Act] Is not relevant to determine whether someone has a ‘money shipping company’ without a permit under section 1960, “the def.

The organization also argued that “in no case has the analysis of a criminal court of section 1960 supported or the new interpretation of the DOJ endorsed or endorsed.”

If it is left non-addressed, the Defi Education Fund says that the departure of the DOJ of a “clear, logically solid and established definition of money transmission” creates liability for software developers of non-evidence technology in the United States.

Cryptto’s relationship with supervisors has taken a big step forward under the government of President Donald Trump, Emphasized by the growing list of closed investigation of the SEC and lawsuits, plus progress on a regulatory framework for stablecoins.

But getting clarity from the DOJ in section 1960 remains an important challenge, according to the Defi Education Fund.

“We see incredible progress, and because an industry is working on a purpose of ‘sustainable victories’ is our priority to ensure that software developers (for Defi, Crypto, AI, etc.) are protected for the long term,” said a spokesperson for the Defi Education Fund Decrypt. “We believe that clarity about conference intention with regard to paragraph 1960 is in the best interest of software developers.”

Earlier this year Dress the doj Regarding the section of the interpretation 1960, the Crypto development agency criminalizes through its overly broad interpretation.

Published by Stacy Elliott