The U.S. Congress promotes the "Promoting Blockchain Development and Innovation Act," proposing to amend Section 1960 to establish a "safe harbor" for open-source developers.

On February 28, U.S. lawmakers from both parties jointly introduced the “Promoting Innovation in Blockchain Development Act” on February 26, aiming to clarify the legal responsibilities of blockchain developers and prevent open-source code authors from being mistakenly classified as remittance institutions. The proposal, led by Scott Fitzgerald, Ben Cline, and Zoe Lofgren, focuses on amending Section 1960 of the U.S. Code to target custodians who control customer assets or execute transfers on behalf of users.

The bill suggests that, amid rising debates over whether “open-source software developers should bear remittance licensing responsibilities” and “legal risks for non-custodial blockchain developers,” clear exemptions should be provided for entities that only write or distribute code. The ongoing lawsuits related to Tornado Cash have further amplified industry concerns about “code as crime.” Ben Cline noted that long-term regulatory expansion blurs the line between malicious actors and technological innovators; Scott Fitzgerald also emphasized that innovators should not face undue law enforcement pressure for developing infrastructure.

Industry support has come from the Solana Institute and the Blockchain Association, which believe the bill will help establish a clear framework distinguishing “open-source developers from custodial financial intermediaries.” Meanwhile, discussions in Washington also include topics like the CLARITY Act and the GENIUS Act. The former, passed by the House in 2025 but with slowed progress, aims to clarify regulations, while the latter enhances stablecoin oversight without expanding developer responsibilities.

Analysts believe that if enacted, the “Promoting Innovation in Blockchain Development Act” will set a precedent for reshaping the U.S. crypto regulatory framework and defining blockchain developers’ compliance boundaries. Ongoing lobbying efforts continue, and the specific wording and scope of the Section 1960 amendments could be a key factor influencing U.S. crypto policy in 2026.