U.S. Crypto Custody Rules: What’s Next?

Strong Signals from Washington

The Trump administration is making good on its commitment to position the United States as the global hub for digital assets—starting with regulatory clarity. The White House Working Group’s latest report offers the clearest articulation yet of where U.S. policymakers are headed, coming right on the heels of the passage of GENIUS.

What’s most notable? This isn’t abstract guidance or high-level principle-setting. The report tackles real-world issues that will define the next chapter of crypto regulation,starting with self-custody, qualified custodians, and adherence to NIST standards. These priorities now sit at the core of the federal digital asset agenda.

Why This Moment Matters

The absence of clear legal frameworks has long been the single biggest obstacle to institutional adoption of digital assets. That obstacle is now being dismantled.

This report represents a transition from aspirational policy talk to specific, actionable guidance. For institutional players still weighing entry into the digital asset space, this is a regulatory inflection point.

If the Working Group’s recommendations are implemented through formal rulemaking by agencies like the SEC, CFTC, and OCC, the resulting clarity could unlock significant capital, innovation, and infrastructure development across the space.

What’s Changing in Crypto Custody

The Working Group’s recommendations will, if adopted, impose new standards and unlock new opportunities. Three areas are especially critical:

Banks and NIST Standards

Under the Working Group’s guidance, financial institutions offering digital asset custody would need to meet cybersecurity and operational benchmarks aligned with NIST (National Institute of Standards and Technology) frameworks.

This is a major shift. While NIST standards are still in development, they represent the de facto gold standard for federal cybersecurity compliance. Banks and other financial institutions will remain hesitant to fully embrace digital asset services until these benchmarks are codified. Getting them right is essential.

Bundled Custody + Trading Models Are Getting Regulatory Backing

The Working Group report makes a pivotal acknowledgment: in line with traditional financial market practices, intermediaries such as securities broker-dealers and futures commission merchants (FCMs) must be permitted to custody client assets to facilitate trading activity. This aligns directly with the SEC’s recent position permitting physical settlement of ETFs, which reinforces the operational legitimacy of such structures.

By explicitly endorsing these bundled arrangements, the report signals a broader acceptance of integrated custody-trading models – long viewed with skepticism by some regulators. Yet this endorsement also invites a deeper question: To what extent should self-custody be permitted for regulated intermediaries that already provide custody services as part of their trading operations? This will be a central issue as the regulatory framework matures.

AML and Sanctions Compliance: A Persistent Crossroad

The tension between robust AML/CFT enforcement and digital asset innovation remains one of the most enduring challenges in regulatory policy. The Working Group report acknowledges this tension head-on, advocating for enhanced oversight and stronger compliance controls while continuing to encourage responsible digital asset adoption.

This balancing act is significant. AML/CFT concerns have frequently been leveraged to stall industry progress, often framing digital assets as inherently risky. While the report’s approach reflects a more nuanced perspective, it’s clear that custody providers and platforms will need to take a proactive stance. Strengthening controls without stifling innovation will be essential, not just for compliance, but for maintaining credibility in a landscape where scrutiny is only intensifying.

Historical Stakes and Strategic Implications

To understand the gravity of this moment, consider the last time financial infrastructure received this level of attention: the Federal Reserve Act of 1913 and the Securities Acts of 1933 and 1934. Nearly a century later, digital assets are now commanding similarly coordinated federal attention.

For institutions, this is a strategic call to action: modernize your digital asset infrastructure or risk falling behind. Wallets are the critical foundation, serving as the operational core for custody-as-a-service, tokenization, minting and burning, and institutional payments infrastructure.

Priority areas include:

• Wallet Security
  Upgrade to infrastructure that meets (or anticipates) NIST-grade benchmarks.
• Operational Suitability
  Align custody solutions with internal control frameworks and risk management systems.
• Regulatory Readiness
  Ensure all infrastructure is adaptable to forthcoming federal rules and examiner scrutiny.

Bottom Line: Infrastructure First

The new era of digital asset custody will be defined not by speculation, but by standards—and infrastructure will lead the way. Custody, wallet infrastructure, and security rails are no longer auxiliary concerns. They are the foundation of institutional participation and competitive differentiation.

Those who invest in scalable, secure, and compliant infrastructure today will be positioned to lead tomorrow’s digital asset ecosystem.

Key Takeaways

• The U.S. is shifting from policy ambiguity to regulatory action on digital asset custody.
• New rules will prioritize NIST compliance, qualified custodians, and AML controls.
• Institutions must evaluate wallet infrastructure, custody models, and regulatory alignment.
• The strategic window for future-proofing digital asset operations is now.