As cryptocurrencies continue to change the global financial landscape, their influence on politics and regulation has become increasingly apparent. Nowhere is this more evident than in the United States, where the crypto industry has poured unprecedented amounts of money into the 2024 election cycle. However, across the Atlantic, the United Kingdom has taken a markedly different approach to the intersection of crypto and politics. This difference offers valuable lessons for the U.S. as it wrestles with the challenges and opportunities offered by digital assets.
Regulatory Approaches – Measured vs. Fragmented
The U.S. could take cues from the UK in its regulatory approach. The UK has adopted a measured and phased approach to crypto regulation, with a clear focus on consumer protection and tackling financial crime.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) has taken the lead in implementing key measures, such as imposing money laundering regulations on crypto exchanges, banning the sale of crypto-backed derivatives to retail consumers, and extending financial promotion restrictions to most crypto assets.
The U.S. regulatory landscape remains fragmented, with multiple agencies competing for oversight. This has led to a lack of a comprehensive federal framework and a series of aggressive enforcement actions by the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC). The resulting regulatory uncertainty has pushed the crypto industry to intensify its lobbying efforts, further blurring the lines between politics and regulation.
Another area where the U.S. could take cues from the UK is in its regulatory approach. The UK has adopted a measured and phased approach to crypto regulation, with a clear focus on consumer protection and tackling financial crime.
For example, while both countries do not accept cryptocurrency for online gambling, the UK allows offshore gambling platforms, like several casinos not on Gamstop, to provide gambling services to UK residents that accept crypto as payment. This creates a more flexible environment for players. The U.S. gambling sector remains fragmented, with varying laws across states and no unified stance on the legality of online gambling. The same issue seems to persist in how the U.S. deals with campaign finance.
Campaign Finance – A Tale of Two Approaches
The most striking difference between the two countries lies in their approach to campaign finance. In the U.S., crypto-related contributions to the 2024 elections have exceeded $119 million, accounting for nearly half of all corporate political donations. Super PACs like Fairshake have accumulated over $200 million, wielding significant influence over election outcomes. This flood of crypto money into American politics has the potential to shape policy decisions and regulatory frameworks for years to come.
The UK’s stricter campaign finance laws, on the other hand, have effectively limited the crypto industry’s ability to directly influence elections through financial contributions. The Political Parties, Elections, and Referendums Act 2000 imposes strict caps on donations and demands high levels of transparency. As a result, no single industry, including crypto, can dominate political funding in the way we’re seeing in the United States.
Political Engagement- High-Profile vs. Subdued
This massive difference in campaign finance approaches has led to varying levels of political engagement from the crypto industry. In the U.S., crypto has become a prominent election issue, with presidential candidates taking explicit pro-crypto stances and the industry launching large-scale advocacy campaigns.
The UK, on the other hand, has seen a more subdued form of engagement. While former high-profile politicians like Philip Hammond and George Osborne have taken advisory roles with crypto firms, and cross-party parliamentary groups focused on blockchain and digital assets exist, crypto is unlikely to be a major election topic in the UK.
Towards a More Coordinated Regulatory Strategy
The U.S. could benefit from adopting a more coordinated and phased approach to regulation, similar to the UK’s strategy. This could provide clearer guidelines for the industry while still allowing for innovation. Additionally, the U.S. could learn from the UK’s emphasis on consumer protection while fostering innovation, an approach that could help build public trust in the crypto industry.
CBDC Development: Transparency and Public Trust
The development of central bank digital currencies (CBDCs) is another area where the two countries split. Both countries are exploring the possibility of a digital version of their national currency but with different approaches and public reactions. The UK has been transparent about its exploration of a “digital pound,” clearly differentiating it from cryptocurrencies and actively addressing civil liberties concerns. The U.S., meanwhile, is still in the research phase of a digital dollar, with ongoing debates over privacy implications and the Federal Reserve’s role.
Learning from the UK’s Approach
As cryptocurrencies continue to integrate into the global financial system, the approaches taken by different countries will shape the future of finance and politics. The U.S., as a global financial leader, has the opportunity to learn from the UK’s more measured and consumer-focused approach. By adopting stricter campaign finance laws, and implementing a more coordinated regulatory strategy, the U.S. could develop a more balanced and effective framework for integrating cryptocurrencies into its political and economic landscape.
Bitcoin 
Ethereum 
Tether 
BNB 
XRP 
USDC 
Wrapped SOL 
TRON 
Lido Staked Ether 
Cardano 
Avalanche 
Toncoin