日本語
2026 Digital Assets Law Primer:
How Legal and Regulatory Shifts Are Redefining Finance
As we move deeper into 2026, digital assets have become firmly embedded in the global financial system. Yet many organizations still overlook the fact that even if they aren’t holding cryptocurrencies or experimenting with tokenization, they’re already part of the digital‑assets ecosystem. The financial infrastructure is shifting rapidly, and those changes will inevitably influence their operations, risk exposure, and regulatory responsibilities.
The shift from traditional systems to decentralized finance (DeFi) models and tokenized assets ushers in a new era of collaboration as financial institutions, regulators, and governments work to ensure a smooth integration of these technologies into the existing legal and regulatory frameworks.
Tokenized settlement models are rapidly encroaching on legacy payment systems. Regulators are rewriting and firming up immature custody rules. Governments are beginning to treat stablecoins as officially regulated financial instruments.
Organizations that cannot adapt to these changing dynamics will find themselves exposed to risks they never anticipated. The transformation underway is not just technological and financial; it’s legal.
Regulatory Clarity
For over a decade, governments and regulatory bodies scrambled to understand digital assets’ implications in global financial and consumer markets. However, in recent years, administrations have started building comprehensive legal structures that define how businesses issue, trade, supervise, and maintain custody of these entities. In the United States, the GENIUS Act is the most significant federal action on digital assets in history. This legislation provides needed guidance on payment stablecoin issuance, reserve requirements, redemption rights, and licensing obligations. The SEC and CFTC are rolling out rules that will shape how they will treat digital assets, with implementation slated for mid-2026.
Organizations can expect greater clarity on token classifications. The long-standing debate between securities and commodities has caused confusion for businesses. However, with the advancement of market-structure legislation, the lines between SEC and CFTC authority have sharpened, allowing companies to better understand their compliance requirements. Similarly, the SEC’s shift away from SAB 121 creates opportunities for state-chartered trust companies and other qualified custodians to offer services to institutional clients within more traditional and familiar regulatory parameters.
Global Standards
While the US has made significant strides in regulating digital assets, global efforts will also impact multinational organizations. The UK’s Property (Digital Assets etc.) Act of 2025 designates digital assets as a distinct property class, providing clarity for courts and market participants around issues like custody, lending, and insolvency. The European Union has expanded its post-MiCA (Markets in Crypto-Assets) rulemaking to cover areas like tokenized securities, cross-border passporting, and stablecoin oversight.
At the same time, Hong Kong, Singapore, and the UAE are competing to become global hubs for digital asset infrastructure, aiming to provide regulatory certainty and attract investment in tokenized markets. However, while the global regulatory landscape harmonizes in principle, the practical implementation of rules can vary significantly between regions. Organizations must execute legal responses in a world where the regulatory expectations are similar but differ markedly in terms of execution across borders.
Custody, Settlement, and Insolvency
Digital assets introduce new challenges to well-established rules on custodians, settlement procedures, and insolvency. Custody is becoming a core, regulated function with direct implications for risk management and fiduciary responsibilities. The SEC’s updated guidance now permits certain state-chartered trust companies to custody digital assets, but with conditions akin to traditional financial services oversight.
This shift allows banks, broker-dealers, and asset managers to expand their services into the digital asset space. But it also creates new compliance challenges. Financial institutions that begin offering digital asset services must implement safeguards like key-management controls, client asset segregation, on-chain settlement procedures, and auditability. With more transactions settled on distributed ledgers, regulators are beginning to question when to consider an on-chain transaction final and how to supervise smart-contract-based settlement procedures.
Legal experts and regulators are increasingly focusing on whether digital assets held by a platform belong to the customer or the platform’s estate in the event of bankruptcy. The answer depends heavily on legal segregation, contractual rights, and custody structures. Organizations that fail to implement clear policies risk exposing themselves and their customers to catastrophic losses if the platform becomes insolvent.
Tokenization
Driven by the promise of faster settlement, increased liquidity, and operational efficiency, financial institutions are increasingly tokenizing assets such as money-market funds, Treasury collateral, corporate bonds, real estate, and structured products. However, with tokenization comes a host of legal complexities that organizations must address.
