Further affirming this promise, Trump issued an to establish a cryptocurrency working group, which was tasked with proposing new regulations for digital assets and exploring the creation of a national cryptocurrency reserve, thereby continuing the pledge to swiftly reform the country鈥檚 cryptocurrency policy.

As a part of the new administration, Mark Uyeda, the new Acting Chair of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), announced plans to to develop a comprehensive and clear regulatory framework. The primary objective of the task force will be to assist the Commission in establishing clear regulatory boundaries, providing realistic paths to registration, crafting sensible disclosure frameworks, and deploying enforcement resources judiciously. The overarching goal is to transition from what has been termed regulation by enforcement to a more structured regulatory approach.

What will be the regulatory approach?

Looking forward, it will be necessary to establish a regulatory framework for cryptocurrencies that could be similar to that of the banking industry. It is probable that the SEC, as opposed to the Commodity Futures Trading Commission, will emerge as the final regulator for this sector. Such a regulatory structure would offer the advantage of clearly defining the role and significance of cryptocurrencies both within the United States and outwardly in other global economies.

You can learn more about cryptocurrencies鈥� role in US financial markets in the , available on YouTube

Recently, the SEC鈥檚 Division of Enforcement鈥檚 own Crypto Assets & Cyber Unit has been rebranded as its Cyber & Emerging Technologies Unit, with the aim of this rebranding seemingly focused more on fraud and retail use. This change continues with the SEC鈥檚 overall theme of inserting regulation early in the process rather than doing so by enforcement actions.

The current administration’s dynamic stance on cryptocurrencies signals a pivotal shift in the regulatory landscape. From President Trump’s assertive moves to establish a cryptocurrency-friendly environment to the proactive measures by the SEC and the U.S. Senate Banking Committee, it is evident that cryptocurrency is poised to become a fundamental component of the financial system. However, the juxtaposition of regulatory clarity and the inherent risks of digital assets necessitates a balanced and thoughtful approach. As we advance, it is imperative to construct a robust framework that fosters innovation while safeguarding the integrity and security of the nation鈥檚 financial ecosystem.

Sen. Tim Scott (R-SC), Chairman of the Banking Committee, delivered the for the Committee鈥檚 hearing on Investigating the Real Impacts of Debanking in America. In his address, Scott emphasized that the use of cryptocurrency and other digital assets in banking is fundamental to participating in a free and fair society. This suggests an intention to limit financial institutions’ ability to de-bank or de-risk based on digital currency usage.

While this notion appears advantageous, it raises several concerns regarding the future of cryptocurrency. Additionally, there was minimal discussion on the use of cryptocurrencies in illegal activities and the associated risks. As a former chief of the SEC鈥檚 Office of Internet Enforcement once noted: 鈥淓very single crime you can conceive of is easier to do now because of crypto.鈥� Thus, it would seem imprudent to proceed with improperly regulated cryptocurrency while simultaneously attempting to de-risk it.

Is crypto the future?

The indication is clear that decentralized finance, particularly cryptocurrencies, will be a significant trend in the future. In this context, it is essential to acknowledge that the US will play a crucial role in establishing a regulatory framework around this asset. Given the stance of the current administration, a comprehensive reassessment of the previous regime’s actions is necessary to ensure an optimal position for implementing regulations.

A hint of foreshadowing can be observed in the joint submission of 鈥� submitted by the SEC and Binance, the largest cryptocurrency exchange in terms of daily trading volume 鈥� to stay the regulator’s lawsuit against the cryptocurrency exchange. While, this joint filing references the potential influence of the recently established SEC task force, it also underscores a shift in the economic sphere, shown by the judge granting a in the lawsuit. Indeed, it is likely that there will be a change in regulation significant enough to settle this lawsuit within the 60-day stay that the court has granted.

Conclusion

It is clear that the current administration has decided to set itself apart from prior administrations in many ways, and crypto regulation is a very visible way to show the difference. Congress and the SEC along with other actors are poised to make crypto a fundamental part of the US financial system. In the not-so-distant future, the impacts of these new changes will become more apparent.

Nonetheless, the juxtaposition of regulatory clarity with the inherent risks associated with digital assets warrants a balanced and prudent approach. Moving forward, it is essential to develop a comprehensive framework that promotes innovation while ensuring the integrity and security of the financial ecosystem.

You can find more about the challenges and opportunities of cryptocurrency here

This new policy direction comes at a time when EVs has surged in consumer popularity and as the American automaker and component supply chain invests heavily in a shift away from gas-powered vehicles.

Growth of the US EV market

EVs experienced a of 52% in 2023 and despite a slowed pace in 2024, those totals were still above 2023鈥檚 numbers. The gap in sales over the last year was filled by plug-in hybrid electric vehicles (PHEVs).

The State of California holds tremendous influence over the automobile industry due to its market size and is currently the 鈥� with one-third of all EV units nationally being sold in the state. California has held special authority from the Environmental Protection Agency to adopt stricter emission regulations than the federal government since the 1970s. The state received approval from the federal government toward the end of the Biden Administration to starting in 2035. California Governor Gavin Newsom has pledged to revive its own should the federal tax credits disappear.

Indeed, transmission capacity is truly a bipartisan issue 鈥� traditionally left-leaning states are seeking increased transmission to support clean energy goals while traditionally right-leaning states are seeing data-center growth.

EV-maker Tesla (of whom the largest shareholder is Trump advisor Elon Musk) currently holds reign as the and generates more profit per vehicle than its rivals. (However, the brand has had a bumpy ride over the past several weeks 鈥� despite a filmed endorsement by President Trump 鈥� because of the link between the Telsa and Musk.) Further, the removal of a federal tax credit subsidy would impact rival brands like Ford and GM more greatly than Tesla. While for federal tax credits, for their long-range variant batteries.

Market deterrents and charging needs

One of the for Americans in considering an EV purchase is range anxiety 鈥� the concern about the distance an EV can cover from one charge. Less than 5% of car trips in the United States are longer than 30 miles and only 0.1% of car trips exceed 500 miles, but the anxiety persists. EVs require consecutive coverage of charging infrastructure accessibility between cities (a minimum number of fast chargers spaced fewer than 50 miles apart).

Charging options vary widely in the wattage they deliver and speed of charging. For example, a Level 2 EV charger (such as one might have in their home) can recharge a vehicle in four to six hours, whereas DC Fast Chargers offer a much faster charge by wattage. As the industry leader, Tesla deployed its own network of fast chargers across the United States in the early 2020s and has since by modifying their chargers to be adaptable to more EV brands. Currently, only Nevada and California meet state-level fast coverage metrics, with consecutive coverage areas being highest in New England, the West Coast, and Florida for state-level minimum coverage.

Many state legislatures have changed their own utility rules to allow for private businesses to own and operate EV and PHEVs charging stations, effectively offering retail sale of electricity to the public as a non-utility. and were the final two of all 50 states to adopt these legislative changes, which were both passed early in 2024.

Interestingly, the US automobile industry and component supply chain has gone all in on EVs. Traditional automakers face substantial competition from Chinese automakers in the EV market globally, and the newly increased 20% tariff on Chinese imports also looms over auto manufacturers鈥� heads, which adds pressure to have a . While US-based EV battery factories numbered only two in 2019, more than 30 are planned, under construction, or operational this year.

Many state legislatures have changed their own utility rules to allow for private businesses to own and operate EV and PHEVs charging stations, effectively offering retail sale of electricity to the public as a non-utility.

States including Ohio, Georgia, Kentucky, Tennessee, Mississippi, and South Carolina have as new industry clusters. For example, represents 6% of all automobile industry employees in the US, and the $5.8 billion BlueOval SK Battery Park (serving Ford and other automobile manufacturers) located in Glendale, Kentucky, will produce domestically-made EV batteries. Toyota, Ford, Honda, BMW, Daimler, , and Hyundai all currently or will soon assembly EVs within the US.

Energy emergency and utility grid investment

President Trump has declared a 鈥� the first ever presidentially-declared national energy emergency. In his , President Trump encouraged increased domestic production of oil and gas and continued coal production 鈥� a noted de-emphasis on renewable energy sources. The US currently is a net exporter of fossil fuels and produces more oil and gas than any other country in the world and more than any point in American history. Where Trump鈥檚 call for energy investment holds is in the need to update and expand transmission capacity and the resiliency of American utility grid infrastructure.

The U.S. Department of Energy reports that the nation has a pressing need for . And while forecasted numbers for energy demand show it over the next 5 to 10 years, there is agreement that transmission capacity must be a high-priority for domestic utilities. This increased demand is also accompanied by more frequent severe and extreme weather which drives the need for grid modernization.

Indeed, transmission capacity is truly a bipartisan issue 鈥� traditionally left-leaning states are seeking increased transmission to support clean energy goals while traditionally right-leaning states are seeing data-center growth. Public utilities have at times blocked transmission buildout to protect the viability of gas and coal sources, but President Trump has promised to streamline permitting procedures for power grid enhancements. To meet projected demand, over the next decade, and that power would likely need to be sourced from a blend of renewable and non-renewable resources.

As the rapidly expanding EV market collides with shifting federal and state energy policies and as fossil fuel is prioritized by the Trump Administration, the automobile and supply chain markets continue to forge onward. Policymakers face urgent decisions to invest in their utility infrastructure and transmission investment, as well as energy source diversification to sustain future power demands.

You can find more about how companies are managing their supply chains here

In 2024, the federal government was rated as the between the oil and gas and pharmaceutical industries.

As he is about to begin his second term, President-elect Donald Trump and advisors including Elon Musk have promised sweeping changes to the way the federal government works 鈥� changes, not surprisingly, that will focus on how various agencies operate. Musk has been teamed with former Republican presidential candidate and pharmaceutical entrepreneur Vivek Ramaswamy to lead the (DOGE), a commission aimed at reducing federal spending by $2 trillion annually and decreasing the workforce of federal agencies by 75%.

As state and local governments anticipate the ripple effect of changes at the federal level, this mirrors historic efforts under the Reagan and Clinton Presidential Administrations to deliver greater government efficiency 鈥� to a much larger and potentially more impactful degree, of course.

鈥淒raining the swamp鈥�: A Reagan-era rallying cry revisited

While many credit President Trump with popularizing the rallying cry to 鈥渄rain the swamp鈥�, the phrase was used in 1982 , as he was initiating his own efforts to improve government agency efficiency and downsize the federal government. President Reagan formed the President鈥檚 Private Sector Survey on Cost Control in the Federal Government under CEO J. Peter Grace, an effort more commonly recalled as .

This was a federally scaled version of Reagan鈥檚 which was executed during his tenure as governor of the State of California. The Grace Commission was privately funded and brought together more than 150 corporate leaders to review agencies and functions within the federal government. Many of the Grace Commission鈥檚 recommendations would require legislative buy-in, which prevented a large number of them from ever being implemented.

A similar approach to government efficiency was brought forth during the Clinton Administration in 1993, the , a program championed by then-Vice President Al Gore. This time, advice came from inside experts 鈥� longtime federal employees who had a keen sense of opportunities for efficiency and customer service improvements. Realizing the roadblocks which Congress could pose, the program tried to focus primarily on administrative changes which could be made without lawmakers鈥� approval.

The partnership brought forth plain-English documents and improved customer service, while offering less onerous regulations and downsizing agencies and workforce numbers to record post-Cold War levels.

Reform or reduction: Differing visions for DOGE

While DOGE is not an official federal department and will likely be set up as a (similar to how the Grace Commission was established), it will be able to make recommendations, subject to public transparency laws. However, DOGE will need to rely on Congress to implement said recommendations. Constitutionally, only Congress holds the power to authorize and fund new agencies, and they can choose to take or dismiss feedback from commissions as it relates to the federal budget.

While Musk and Ramaswamy have pledged that they will not be paid for their roles as co-leaders of DOGE, if they are formal employees (unpaid or otherwise), they would be classified as Special Government Employees and would have to file financial disclosures and be subjected to federal employee conflict of interest penalties. Musk and his companies (including X, SpaceX, and Tesla) may face further scrutiny because of his DOGE role as those entities are and still face ongoing federal investigations.

Ramaswamy has , but mass layoffs (or reductions in force, as they are called), aren鈥檛 an easy undertaking. Employees have the ability to appeal to the Merit Systems Protection Board, and because of the Constitutionally granted Congressional authorities, eventually Congress must authorize some of these decisions.

that cuts will 鈥渘ot impact day-to-day life for Americans鈥� or impact Social Security, or Department of Defense spending. Of course, it remains unclear if the goal of DOGE is truly to reduce federal agency services and the size of the federal government, or if it is to balance the federal budget through bipartisan consensus on spending priorities. Both appear, at first blush, to be roles best suited to Congress.

Unique to this administration, legislative caucuses have been formed in both the and the , under the same acronym DOGE, but in this case which stands for Delivering Outstanding Government Efficiency. Caucus members have shared personal goals of reducing the national debt; managing fraud, waste & abuse within the federal government; and to root out wasteful spending (often called .)

This effort to mirror an Executive Advisory Committee with bicameral legislative caucuses may make Congressional implementation of committee recommendations more feasible than prior administrations found. DOGE is scheduled to be sunset in July 2026, compelling it to focus on short-term Executive actions and rely on lawmakers for longer-term support.

Rebuilding trust with the public

It is clear that the incoming Trump Administration has effectively gauged the public鈥檚 sentiment around the effectiveness of federal government agencies and the government in general. To rebuild public trust in these institutions, there are three approaches which need to be generated from within the federal government and brought forward through government agencies:

Humanize civil servants 鈥� Are there ways to feature or call out the individuals who work within the federal government to make it less of a faceless bureaucracy? Of the more than 2 million federal employees, 80% work outside the Washington, DC metro area and are in non-political roles. Americans actually of non-partisan civil servants.

Continuously improve user experience 鈥� Musk has advocated radical transparency under DOGE, encouraging the public to submit their suggestions for wasteful areas to target, and the House DOGE Caucus also has opened up a suggestion email box. Encouraging direct public engagement from citizens could work toward rebuilding trust. Technological improvements which also could improve customers鈥� experience with federal agencies may also address accusations of inefficiency.

Strengthening oversight 鈥� Empower agencies鈥� Offices of Inspectors General to continue to detect and prevent fraud, waste & abuse. Heightened levels of transparency with the public through portals like , risk-based screening tools for federal funding, and generally increasing awareness of Inspectors General work can begin to address accusations of waste.

As the new presidential administration makes ambitious promises of government efficiency, the success of DOGE will depend on balancing bold promises and the limitations of implementation within the Executive Branch. Based on the successes and challenges of the Reagan and Clinton Administrations, public trust in the federal government may increase with a greater focus on transparency, improved user experiences, and newly empowered non-political civil servants.

You can read more about here.