Caitlin Long on Trump's promises to support Bitcoin in the U.S.
07/31/2024 05:13Caitlin Long discusses how Trump’s pro-bitcoin stance could transform U.S. financial regulations.
As the Bitcoin Conference wrapped up, Roundtable anchor Rob Nelson and Caitlin Long, Founder and CEO of Custodia Bank, delved into the implications of a Trump presidency for the crypto world. Trump, having just spoken at the event, left the audience with much to ponder.
Rob Nelson kicked off the conversation by referencing former President Trump's recent statements. Speaking at the conference, Trump suggested establishing a strategic bitcoin reserve and expressed intentions to fire SEC Chair Gary Gensler. This announcement was met with considerable enthusiasm, underscoring the contentious relationship between current regulatory practices and the crypto community.
Caitlin Long elaborated on the implications of such political changes. She highlighted that a president with a pro-bitcoin stance could fundamentally alter the regulatory landscape. Long mentioned that both Trump and RFK Jr. have proposed initiatives that would urge bank regulators to understand and integrate bitcoin into the financial system. This shift could rectify the long-standing resistance and ignorance exhibited by current regulators.
One of the critical points Long made was about the need for an industry group of experts to educate bank regulators. She recounted her experience with Custodia Bank, where they were denied a Fed master account due to regulators' lack of understanding of bitcoin. She emphasized that the regulatory bodies had ignored the opportunity to learn and adapt, influenced by figures like Elizabeth Warren who actively worked against the industry.
Moreover, Long pointed out the global context, noting that the Bank for International Settlements has allowed banks to hold bitcoin on their balance sheets for over 18 months. However, the U.S. regulators have yet to provide clear guidance, putting them significantly behind international standards. This lag is largely attributed to the adversarial stance of certain policymakers.