Proposed Ethics Law Mandates Blind Trusts for Crypto Assets Held by Politicians and Families, Bans Endorsing Digital Currencies

This resolution, dubbed the Ban Crypto Corruption Resolution, aims to put a hard stop on public officials using their positions to cash in on the digital asset boom. It starts by airing some serious concerns about the alleged crypto-related activities and wealth accumulation of a former President’s family while he was in office, citing specific claims of up to $5 billion in gains from ventures like memecoins and digital trading cards. The resolution argues these actions raise major red flags about conflicts of interest and foreign influence, especially given claims of foreign investments and alleged quid pro quo involving presidential pardons.

The New Rules of Engagement

While the first part of the resolution focuses on past actions, the core of the document is its support for future legislation that would drastically restrict how high-ranking officials and their families can interact with the crypto market. If passed, this supported legislation would prohibit the President, Vice President, Members of Congress, candidates for public office, and high-ranking executive branch employees (and their immediate family members) from issuing, sponsoring, or endorsing any digital assets—that means cryptocurrency, memecoins, stablecoins, and NFTs. Basically, if you’re running the country, you can’t be shilling the next Dogecoin knockoff.

Mandatory Blind Trusts: Two Years in the Dark

The most immediate and practical impact of this proposal involves asset management. The supported legislation would require all covered individuals and their immediate families to place any digital assets they currently hold into a qualified blind trust. This isn’t just a regular trust; the assets must be made completely inaccessible during the individual’s candidacy, their entire public service tenure, and for a full two years after they leave office.

Think about it: if you’re a Congressperson or a high-level staffer who bought Bitcoin back in 2017, you’d lose control of those assets for the duration of your service plus two years. For the individual, this is a significant restriction on their personal economic freedom. For the public, the benefit is clear: it removes the incentive to make policy decisions that might boost the value of their hidden portfolio. It’s a major step toward ensuring officials aren't making laws while secretly hoping their personal tokens moon.

Cutting Off Foreign Investment and Increasing Transparency

To tackle the issue of foreign influence, the supported legislation would explicitly prohibit foreign investment in any digital assets that are issued, promoted, or controlled by these covered officials or their families. This is a direct response to the specific allegations in the resolution about significant investments from foreign entities like the Abu Dhabi-owned firm MGX and the UAE-based Aqua 1 Foundation in Trump-linked crypto projects.

Finally, the bill mandates full and timely disclosure of all cryptocurrency transactions by these officials and their families. Violations of these disclosure rules would be subject to both civil and criminal penalties. This provision aims to bring the opaque world of digital assets under the same ethical scrutiny applied to traditional financial holdings, providing government oversight bodies with the necessary tools to police potential conflicts. The legislation also clarifies that any actions taken by these officials that violate the new rules would be considered unofficial acts, essentially stripping them of the protection of their office for those specific actions.