Navigating a New Era of Digital Asset Regulation & Compliance | Boston Blockchain Week 2026

All right. Here we go. Uh well, thanks everybody. Uh great great uh attendance here. Great conversation.

As as Ian said so perfectly, we had sort of a 30,000-ft view earlier, and we're excited to kind of dive a little bit deeper into some of the amazing um Yeah, I can say amazing, right? Amazing regulatory compliance topics. It is a Yeah, we think it's amazing. Uh so, without further ado, a little bit of an introduction. I'll give you an introduction myself, and then uh two amazing panelists uh joining me here today.

Uh so, as Ian mentioned, my name is Joe Ciccolo. I'm the founder and president of BitAML, and we provide a regulatory compliance consulting services to the crypto space uh for over 11 years now. The other hat I wear is in the policy uh arena, uh where I am the executive director of the California Blockchain Advocacy Coalition, uh a trade association representing crypto, Web3, and blockchain before the California legislature, governor's governor's office, and various different regulatory agencies. Uh but, enough about me. You came for my co-panelists.

So, if we can start ladies first, Kat, if you could introduce introduce yourself, and then on to Brandon.

No, we definitely came for you, too.

Oh.

You We definitely came for you, too. My name is Kat Boemer. I'm the CEO of BlockRain, but I also uh said there's a subsidiary under our company called VeerCor Compliance Group. I am the CEO of a blockchain infrastructure company, but before that, I spent the last uh six years uh first six years of my experience in blockchain and crypto working at a crypto-focused law firm. I worked as their only chief compliance professional with about seven crypto attorneys with a boutique uh type of law firm where we serviced 15 blockchain projects.

Now, I'm going to share a story later on how we got to work, you know, during this time. I actually was hired onto this firm when they said, "If and when the SEC comes and and says something to us." Uh kind of knew that that would that could very much happen. So, I'm going to share a story about that, but got a lot of experience doing that. One thing I've learned at BlockRain is you can't tack compliance onto blockchain infrastructure later.

Let's do it at the beginning. So, that's what we do at BlockRain with Vair Core. So, I'm excited to be here to share some experience.

Awesome. Thanks, Kat. Brandon Chasse, I'm with Wolf & Company. I'm an assurance senior manager there. Been there my whole career for for 10 years now.

Currently work within our digital asset practice. So, I've been doing that probably the last 6 years. And my current efforts are focused on our stablecoin and proof of reserve attestation efforts.

Fantastic. And speaking of proof of reserve as we dial into our federal update, I think it's a very appropriate segue here to talk about one-to-one reserving as one of the key components. In fact, I might say the key component of the genius act. Without trust, we have nothing in financial services. So, Brandon, maybe you can take it away and talk a little bit about what one-to-one reserve is all about and and what expectations are out there.

Yeah, absolutely. So, really yeah, the headlines is is is the one-to-one reserve backing. But really the the the challenge is is proving that out. So, as part of the genius act, the genius act was implemented July of 2025 and will be fully enacted in January of 2027. And part of that is the one-to-one backing, meaning that for every token outstanding, the issuer needs to have a one-to-one reserve asset for that.

So, currently the permitted reserve assets consist of things like cash and cash equivalents, US Treasuries, money market funds, and then repurchase agreement agreements. With that, too, from the assurance side, comes monthly examinations under the genius act. So, as part of those monthly examinations now, a permitted payment stablecoin issuer will be required to have monthly examinations starting in January. Right now, it's really voluntary and more but the main parts of that is is really three parts. The first part is can the issuer prove the tokens outstanding?

Number two, is can the issuer prove that those reserve assets? And number three, can they reconcile the three?

Excellent. There's there's a raft of other key components we have up on the screen. Um it's interesting, Cat, you and I were joking about the quote-unquote loophole uh as it pertains to yield. Maybe you can tell the folks a little bit about what that's all about, and and we'll we'll reserve some time later on to talk about clarity, but uh maybe share your initial thoughts on on uh yield and and why it's such a hot topic.

Well, what I love about the Genius Act, and I have to say this from a compliance standpoint, is we actually have a law. Like, I love that it's law. You know, and on from the market structure side, like it it's there. Like, it's going to be where it we've got some And I call clarity is oxygen. I feel like in this space that we've been operating in for a while in the digital asset space, I've been looking for oxygen, and we've got some breath.

Did you feel that? Do you feel that? Cuz I it's a big part for me. And so, I'm only saying that from a market from a the little bit of the Is it it it helps us, but on the exchange side, where do you think is a little bit of the gap? Like on the exchange side of things?

Sure. Well, I think

think?

Well, I think with with yield, if we want to talk specifically about yield, um in the Genius Act, uh it's a there's a prohibition against stablecoin issuers from offering yield rewards, incentives, keep an even playing field, and and not mess with things that are very important, like the one-to-one uh reserve backing and all the financials that go into that. However, what was not written into law was any sort of prohibition against third parties offering yield. And so, enter exchanges and other platforms that are offering in some cases 6 plus percent. I've seen 12 percent. I've I've seen a lot of things uh in terms of offerings of yield.

Uh and in fact, what has happened is the bankers uh have sort of used, in my opinion, uh the uh current legislation with clarity to sort of re-adjudicate and close this quote-unquote loophole. So,

And that's what section 404 was going to do, with the Clarity Act. Right.

Exactly. Exactly. So, um other things to think about when it comes to the Genius Act, you know, one thing I'll pull out is the state federal regime. Uh, a little bit of a of a tug-of-war. So, for those that are unfamiliar within the Genius Act, there's uh, an allowance for states to introduce a {quote} {unquote} substantially similar uh, framework for those with a um, those with 10 billion or less, I believe it is.

Uh, and you know, allowing them to come in through a a smaller window at the state level. And so, we've seen some states kind of step up and compete. We'll talk about that later in our our state update. But, anything else on the on the Genius Act front that we want to cover?

That's great.

I think we hit the most of it. Um, yeah.

Oh, awesome. Yeah, I just put up a little timeline. And Brandon, you were kind enough to sort of allude to some of the different milestones along the way there. We we have current rule making. There's been 11 notice of proposed rule makings uh, thus far.

Perhaps the count went up since the uh, slide was prepared. But, uh, lot of notice of proposed rule making out there. A lot of opportunity for engagement as our previous speakers have said. It's a great opportunity uh, when these things present themselves for folks in industry uh, to actively participate and do so without the use of AI, as I was told in an earlier panel. Uh, so, currently rule making is underway.

Uh, this is supposed to go into effect uh, by 2027. Uh, and states that are introducing frameworks that are substantially similar, my understanding is they have until the end uh, of 2027 to introduce those and get those approved by the US Treasury. But again, we'll talk about some of the states later on when we tackle the state updates.

Right.

So, moving on to clarity. So, if we can talk a little bit about clarity. I know you're very excited about this, Kat. This is a topic near and dear to you. Maybe you can talk talk to us a little bit about clarity.

Sure. Um, like I shared before, I started back um, working with this law firm. And really, all we had was the Howey test, right? A 1969 ruling with orange groves. You know, and one thing that I love about the Clarity Act.

And like I say, clarity to me is oxygen because we just I'm a rule follower. I'm like, "Hey, let's get some rules out here and we'll follow them. We'll build stuff around them." And I think and I have team that works for me. They laugh at me.

They call me a compliance nerd. And I'm okay with that.

badge of honor.

Listen, you build the rules, I'm going to work around it. Now, I come from working in healthcare with the FDA. So, that's very clear. When I came over into this space, I loved it because this was all being developed. So, back in 2021, when we just had the how we test to work around, we started building compliance frameworks, trainings, utilizing that.

So, we make sure we don't meet the four prongs of the how we test. But, one thing I think we need to correct is that the Clarity Act is not like something that we're they're going to vote on to become law. This is actually like a permission slip. It's It's like trying to get permission to do this, if you think about it. It's not something that Oh, we're voting on this on September 15th, where it's everyone's got their own opinions if that's actually going to happen.

It's just asking for permission at this time. And there's like five procedural steps that are going to have to happen after they come to some type of permission decision on the 15th, which that is very much up in the air. If you heard this morning, uh Mr. Hinman wasn't very wanting to didn't really want to have an opinion on if that was going to happen or not.

a good poker face.

Yes, he's like, "Oh, we don't know." So, um but what I love about the the Clarity Act is Another thing, too, is it's closure votes. They need 60. And they're not close to that. They weren't close to that in May, and they're not close right now.

So, but here's the thing that people are wondering about because I'm actually in the space. We've got a blockchain infrastructure company. They're going, "Well, what do we do if the Clarity Act doesn't work? Well, how do we function? What do we do?"

We have breath. We have the Genius Act, which is law. We have a memo, almost a 70-page interpretation memo that came out in March that I think is great. That is guidance. It is not law.

But, it's something. We've got more now that we can work with and build on. So, I think that that's a big thing um when it talks about the Clarity Act, just making it pretty simple about what's happening right now.

Excellent. Brandon, any thoughts on on Clarity?

Yeah, no, um nothing additional. Really really the GENIUS Act has been my focus. Just to go back to the the um the the GENIUS Act. Again, a lot of great a lot of great guidance there that's coming uh to fruition in in January, fully enacted. I think the thing is for um companies right now, especially issuers, to is to, you know, be focused on having that operational readiness now as opposed to when it's fully enacted in in January.

Have it go right controls and gap assessments in place now.

Love that.

Absolutely. And I guess while we're we're switching around and going between topics, let's welcome Patrick. Uh Patrick, want to give a quick uh overview yourself? Oops.

Oh.

We gave him the novelty microphone about that, so.

Glad to be here, and I appreciate everyone's uh patience. Um so, did you want me to chime in on the tax side? So, I wanted to just chime in on a few perspectives from the tax side of things. There's a lot of moving pieces when it comes to taxes and regulations that are going to really impact the market structure and just the behavior of market participants in this area. And it really the big focus this year is on form 1099-DA.

This is the first tax year that this form is being issued to taxpayers from brokers for transactions that happen on their platform. This year, it's going out mostly with zero cost basis. So, all taxpayers are reconciling this form with their own accounting records before reporting it for tax purposes. Going forward into future years, we're going to start to see this cost basis information get phased in, but only for covered assets. So, there's going to be a persistent reconciliation issue that taxpayers are going to have to deal with, and also brokers are going to have to manage as well.

And there's certain types of cost basis that are just not going to be on these form 1099-DAs, whether that's legacy assets that got transferred into these exchanges or assets getting moved between between wallets and exchanges and taxpayers even as we go in the future years are going to have to start reconciling this cost basis information with their own reporting. And tracking cost basis has always been one of the most challenging things for taxpayers. So, we're going to see persistent reconciliation challenges from the form 1099-DA and these cost basis issues that investors are dealing with are not going to be going away anytime soon.

I know, I appreciate you sharing that. Any anything to add, um, Brendan from an accounting perspective or

Um, since we're picking on accountants and tax people right now.

Yeah, it's definitely definitely working again. Um, but yeah, no, from from from the, uh, assurance side, again, it's it's ensuring that, uh, your your your team, the management team is especially all on the same page, understands all of the rules, again, going back to the Genius Act, understands the Genius Act and the tax implications of this, especially, uh, with stablecoins, there are also a lot of tax implications, uh, for those and accounting implications depending how you classify it, which was addressed on a previous panel today.

Fantastic. All right, bringing it back to clarity. Um, any additional thoughts there? I mean, I I know we have a little bit of timeline here. Uh, one thing that I I'm sort of focus on is is sort of questions about what's behind the delay.

Um, and so recently, uh, uh, the, uh, association that represents, uh, law enforcement, uh, moved to a neutral position, uh, which was which was quite a, uh, positive headline for the industry. And so, it was one of the, uh, the then four bullet points that I removed. We still have a couple of our few more bullet points left. Um, stablecoin yield, we we we talked about that. Uh, ethics component is certainly something that's that's really, um, front and center, particularly from the Democrats' perspective, and something that they're trying to get, uh, with clarity moving forward, uh, having some sort of consideration for elected officials in participating in the crypto ecosystem.

I don't know why that would be on their mind, but it is. Um, any thoughts from from the panel in terms of, you know, how we get over these hurdles or what maybe those last obstacles might be?

Well, I'm just saying like when it comes to this the Clarity Act it's Um, we've only got a memo right now. We have a guidance right now. Um, we're like I just said we're five procedural steps even after this gets permission on the 15th if it gets permission to even talk about it on the Senate floor. We still have five procedural steps to get there. And so in my mind we have a guidance but if you're going to base everything on a guidance that could change overnight.

I'm actually leaving here going to New York to to speak in New York Blockchain Week with a couple attorneys that are doing this and we're actually speaking two days after the 15th. And things can change overnight. I mean that's something that we have to remember. Um, and you're going to get to the Howey test in just a minute, right? Are we going to talk about that?

I'd like to talk a little bit about the Howey test because some people have said is the Howey test dead? Do we still use the Howey test? The Clarity Act builds on it. If this goes through and this is just the Howey test is always going to be there. So your best bet is to always stick with the Howey test and those four prongs.

And I'd love to share a little bit of a story about this that in 2021 the law firm that I was working with we got an SEC complaint. It's like 14 pages and we're walking through it but we had already implemented a really great sales training program. Like I told you I've I've trained over 5,000 affiliates not just in the United States but around the world and we based a lot of it on the Howey test and a lot of the other countries that we worked with. And right now even at working at Blockgrain uh, we're talking with different countries doing some blockchain infrastructure in different countries. Believe it or not I was just in the Philippines over the summer.

I was just telling Joe this they're looking at us going, "Well, we're watching you. We're watching the United States, right?" So one of the things you can always bank on is the Howey test. And back in 2021 when we got this 14-page SEC complaint immediately we looked at our training. We looked at how we're training.

We looked at making sure we were working with these 15 blockchain projects to say, "How are you talking about your token? How are you talking about your project? How are you talking about this blockchain? Are you making sure you're not meeting the four prongs of the Howey test?" Right?

We were able to submit all of our training. We actually submitted all of our affiliates, our contractors, our employees, anybody on our team, they had to take a test on understanding the Howey test. What does that mean? They had to have a passing grade. I was a tough tough quiz quizzer.

They had to have a passing grade of a 90, otherwise they had to take the quiz over again. I've got someone in the crowd that actually was on one of those blockchain projects. I think he got a 95. I'm just kidding. Um he passed.

But I'm just saying because we were able to submit that back to the SEC, out of that 14-page complaint, they took out four to six pages, Joe.

Wow.

And they came back and said, "Great job. You did something." So, one of the things I want to encourage people to do, especially from a compliance standpoint, um make sure you're still preparing yourself and utilizing the Howey test. Anything that's happening right now, all this breath that we're getting that's providing oxygen to the digital asset space for compliance, this is breath we're we're getting we're making some headway, but the Howey test isn't going anywhere. And you need to know it.

You need to train your people on it. People need to know about it. And it needs to be built in and bolted on what you're doing when it comes to digital assets. It definitely does.

And that's a good point talking about how this is the next sort of iteration or growth of the Howey test. Whereas I think in in sort of the traditional conversations I'm having in crypto, we wanted something to replace uh the Howey test.

going anywhere.

But it's not going anywhere. So, you know, brush up on the Howey test and and orange groves. Uh and you you'll learn a lot from from that. And I hear some people laughing. They know the inside scoop on that, but um definitely study up on that.

It's not going anywhere as as Cat mentioned. Um any other thoughts on clarity? We want to reserve some time for to go at the state level. No? All right.

Look at this. We're skipping all around. They shouldn't have given me the clicker. This is This is very exciting here. So, let's talk a little bit about the states.

As you know, we're tracking state policy, what's reshaping digital assets, licensing, consumer protection. We'll get Patrick back in here a little bit to talk about some of the the goings-on in Illinois, which is a real big story in the crypto space right now with respect to tax legislation in the great state of Illinois. So, at the state level, we'll bring it back first to our discussion of genius. There are several states that have implemented their {quote} "substantially similar" frameworks. Alabama, Florida, and Georgia chief among them.

I think Florida took it a step further where they have sort of a a pilot project involving payments in state stablecoins at the state level. So, pretty interesting developments there. It's an opportunity in in my Oops. It's an opportunity in my opinion at the states to act as a laboratories of democracy. So, if there's anybody here representing the Commonwealth, that might be a great opportunity to put together a substantially similar framework.

You know, but unfortunately, fortunately, unfortunately, you know, that the sun is going to set on that as I understand it at the end of 2027. So, realistically, that's one legislative session across the board next year for those of us policy wonks. And then real quick, California always ahead of the curve. I guess we were the sort of the Palm Pilot, if you will, of stablecoin legislation back in 2023. There was a regulatory framework, Assembly Bill 39, chapter 6 for those of you fellow policy wonks, where we had our own framework.

But, that's rescinded. So, if anyone's out there reading about that, that no longer applies. But, moving beyond that, any any thoughts in terms of substantially similar, what you're seeing at the state level, you know, anything from your perspective, Brandon?

Yeah, Joe. So, for for any permitted payment stablecoin issuer, it really depends on what their their charter is or their their licensing pathways. So, you have the the federal framework, and then you have the state framework. So, as you said, the substantially similar framework really what that is is making it substantially similar to what what the federal level is is doing. So, the state bodies will ensure that those payment stablecoin issuers, depending on how they are, that they follow that similar to to the federal pathways.

And really what it comes back to in in my eyes is is consumer protections that the state can do it the right way, similar to the federal.

Yeah, absolutely. I think that's a good good segue into further discussion about some of the themes we're seeing at the state level and in particular consumer protection becoming chief among them, you know, as as a person in the in the AML space and the broader compliance space, it's interesting that BSA AML is in some ways being pushed to the side in favor of a focus on consumer protection disclosures. And I think a lot of that has to do with the great success of all these people in this room who've really made crypto much more mainstream, much more acceptable, much more interesting to folks in the more mainstream And so, that There we go. That makes it more more interesting and more compelling in in sort of the mainstream audience. And and now we're seeing consumers that have not previously been involved with crypto that are new to the industry getting involved.

And with that comes along a lot of growing pains anytime there's a new technology, anytime there's new adoption. And so, seeing that shift on on consumer focus and seeing the states kind of stepping up in that area. Um any of our any of our fellow panelists want to offer anything on that?

Well,

Yeah, from state taxing standpoint, something that you may have recently seen is in Illinois is the digital asset tax that is going to be imposed on customers of the exchanges for transferring and storing digital assets. So, this may actually lead to a tax 0.2% being imposed for transactions where you may not even be selling a digital asset. And obviously, because of that, it raises a it there should be a level of awareness raised to taxpayers, so they're prepared for this and they're planning for this. And from an operational standpoint for the exchanges, it raises a lot of questions.

Firstly, sourcing and determining what customers do you actually have to collect funds for based off of where they're located. That's no small lift, and that's going to have to get implemented into these platforms. In addition to that, valuation. So, if you're going to be applying a tax based off of a certain asset value, you're going to have to have arrived at that value and have it documented appropriately. And then of course, uh collecting and remitting the taxes as well when they are collected.

So, this is a good example of a tax that is being put in place that could, number one, change the behavior of how taxpayers and users on a platform are actually transacting. And it also highlights how quickly the compliance challenges and how complicated they can get when we start to see these new taxes um get get enacted.

Yeah, that's a great perspective from the consumer side, Patrick, and I certainly appreciate that. I'm thinking on more of the the side of the platforms, uh exchanges, and others that are that are offering uh buy, sell, trade, uh custody, that sort of thing. What should they Maybe that's a a question more for for Brandon on the consulting side. What what levels of preparation and what are some of the steps that some of these these platforms uh that support digital assets can put in a place now, whether it's in direct response to Illinois or what potentially could be coming down the pike in terms of uh attacks and and tax reporting?

Yeah, no, absolutely. Um I actually like the comment that somebody on an earlier panel made where they said it wasn't just KYC, it was KYD of know knowing your data. Um so really just having that that culture of compliance within the business and ensuring that all of management is on the is on the same page. Um so knowing what you have to do. So for example, under I going back to the the genius act going along the lines of this, um is that when you're talking about the the tokens outstanding, the uh the reserve assets, and then reconciling the two, there has to be a repeatable process every single month for those.

So it has to be repeatable. You have to have the controls in place. The auditors will be will be checking those controls and attesting to those monthly. So if that can be repeated monthly by management, that will set them up forward for any projects that they're going to do in the future.

I have one thing to add. So I love what you're saying there, Brendan, because one of the things in the digital asset space that I think people are not used to, and I experienced this a lot when I worked at the with the previous law firm, is I would say this is what we need to do, and the blockchain company would come back and go, "Where is that in law?" Like now we're getting some. So because we now that we have some, we need to make sure we're doing what Brendan said. We need to watch our promotional claims.

Right? We've got some rules now and some guidance, and we need to do that. And that there has been so much of an attitude of we can kind of do what we want, we can kind of be loosey-goosey, but now we have it. So that the things that need to be done every month need to be done every month.

Yep.

So it needs to be done, and especially in promotional claims, it could become major issues on a state level.

Absolutely. It's a great way to circle back into consumer protection and putting adequate batteries. Here you go. Thank you. No, I was just making the comment that it's sort of a good way to to sort of circle back to consumer protection.

Uh we don't necessarily think about marketing and and AML and KYC kind of link together, uh but but they should be. In fact, AML and and KYC and and compliance should be throughout the institution. In the case of marketing, you know, what are we putting out there? You know, making sure we're very clear in our disclosures, and we're being very conservative in our language. And that's one thing I'll tell you right now at the state level, the states are really focused on that.

So, a little bit of a story, uh when Trump came into office, the then head of the CFPB, Richard Cordray, was out of a job. So, as he's packing up his banker's box and leaving DC, he decided to take his playbook with him and he met with a bunch of different state AGs and state regulators, sat down and said, "Here's a way that you can be a little bit more aggressive on consumer protection. Here are some of the things that have worked for me. You know, let's let's talk about how we can fill the vacuum of what was presumably uh going to be sort of a a wind down or at least a stepping aside, if I may, uh of the CFPB. So, um you know, be very focused on your disclosures, on your fees, uh the risks not only associated with using your services, your platform, but the risks more inherent and more general to to digital assets.

Cuz again, we're welcoming in a whole new group of of mainstream folks coming into crypto. You know, folks in this room are very familiar, generally speaking, with crypto, with the underlying risks, and have been there, done that, have the t-shirt, have the battle scars, but new consumers coming in aren't necessarily aware of that. And despite their research on AI and Claude and and Google, they may not be aware of some of the more intricacies of the industry that that this panel and and this audience has been a part of. So, um

I could add one more

Yes, please do.

If that's okay. Um one of the things that a lot of compliance firms don't think about, but I've been doing this for so long, is is your marketing team pretty much could do your securities analysis, and they didn't even know it. Because they're just putting stuff out there, putting rocket ships, because I have the companies the blockchain projects that work with me at Vera Core Compliance Group, they literally will send me their stuff and I'm like, "Claude just wrote all this, and I got to rewrite it." And they what Claude and Grok is pulling all this from to create their social media captions is from X. And it puts rocket ships and climbing charts and all of this, and I actually saw a tweet probably a couple years ago.

You guys probably saw it. It was from a former SEC person that said, "If you're putting rocket ships, climbing charts, and money smileys in your posts, we're coming after you." Now, that's a Howey thing. So, I'm pretty sure they're still going to do it. So, one of the things I tell these firms is like, "Can you just try to have some originality?

You don't need Claude to write all your stuff immediately, and if you put a rocket ship in it, I'm going to send it right back to you." Because it's that's where AI is pulling everything to write your promotional stuff for consumers to participate. So, be very careful of those things, and people are not even thinking about it, right? They're not even thinking about it. So, I just wanted to add that.

Yeah, slow down on the rocket ships. That's all we have to say.

I don't like rocket ships.

through your compliance team.

Exactly.

Uh with that, we have about a a minute and a half remaining. I want to get some closing thoughts. Um you know, there's two things inevitable in life, death and taxes, Patrick. Maybe you want to close us out on that morbid note, and then we'll we'll come around the panel here.

Yeah, absolutely. I guess my closing thoughts, I'll keep it short. Taxes and compliance are going to increasingly shape the market structure and participants for different users on these platforms as we go forward, and it's going to have an increasing focus as an industry as a whole.

Also, from my perspective, um I would say it comes back to operational readiness. So, again, the the JOBS Act is passed, but doesn't go into full effect into in January 18th, 2027. So, be operationally ready now, have that culture of compliance, and have management be able to understand everything that comes along with it.

Yeah, just to piggyback that, make compliance a little bit more interesting to your employees. Um I actually have as much fun as I can on compliance training, but I try to make it cuz I know everyone hates it, but I will tell you this, I love what he's saying. We have breath, we have a little more clarity, maybe not Clarity Act. Start using some of that, um implementing that, keep the Howey test on the forefront, and let's keep moving forward.

Awesome. And my closing thought would be a we had a great discussion about Clarity Genius, and I I sometimes think of what's going on in DC is kind of eye candy. Keep an eye on what's going on at the state level, all the states, uh cuz they're passing legislation left, right, and center, uh not just with respect to uh frameworks and and licensing. I think that's kind of uh sort of culminated with with California's license. I think we've we've kind of got past that at the state level.

Now, we're on to further field legislation, incorporating uh things like uh unclaimed property, uh you know, how how is your institution dealing with that? Uh seizing of of funds uh and freezing of funds uh tied to illicit activity. We have a bill in California pending on that. So, keep an eye across the state level. These bills are passing uh left, right, and center, and not with a lot of fanfare.

So, it could be tough when you're handling 50 states plus all the territories, but it's important to keep up on that. But, we'll we'll see what happens uh next week in Clarity. Um so, with that, please help me and thank me my panel.