On May 19, U.S. time, when Donald Trump signed the executive order that has been repeatedly quoted by various media at the White House, the cryptocurrency industry truly felt the shock of being “named and ushered to the edge of the dollar payment circle.” The order superficially initiated a procedural review: it required relevant regulatory agencies to identify in three months those terms considered “unreasonable” or “overly obstructive” for fintech companies’ cooperation with federally regulated financial institutions, and then to take actionable steps to encourage financial innovation and reduce unnecessary barriers to entry within six months. The Federal Reserve was explicitly required to review the existing framework and explore possible pathways for non-bank financial institutions — including cryptocurrency companies — to access payment accounts and payment services. Chinese cryptocurrency media quickly followed suit, citing English reports, interpreting this order as a strong signal of “regulatory loosening”: for the first time at the federal level, the systematic inclusion of cryptocurrency companies into the U.S. payment system was written into a presidential directive. Narratively, this marked a significant leap for the cryptocurrency industry from the fringe of state-level licenses, approaching the core of the dollar payment infrastructure; however, in terms of legality and power structure, it neither directly amended congressional legislation nor demanded that the Federal Reserve “open the gate immediately.” How far it can truly progress and whether it can penetrate the discretionary barriers of the Federal Reserve are all compressed into the execution details in the following three to six months.

Three Months of Health Check and Six Months of Sprint: What the Order Specifically Requires

This order first fixed the timeline: three months for a “health check,” followed by six months for “sprinting.” In the first three months, the named federal agencies such as the Treasury and the Financial Regulatory Bureau are tasked with revisiting existing rules to specifically identify terms that are deemed “unreasonable” or “overly obstructive” in relation to fintech companies, particularly hindering their cooperation with federally regulated financial institutions — not a rash amendment of rules, but a review report that clearly outlines which thresholds are too high and which processes deadlock cooperation. In the subsequent six months, the order calls for these agencies to no longer remain in a “research attitude,” but to “take specific measures”: simplifying approval processes, eliminating unnecessary barriers to market entry, and through official guidelines, exemptions, or process reorganization, encouraging banks and various fintech and cryptocurrency companies to collaborate under compliance prerequisites.

The most sensitive portion is left to the Federal Reserve. The order directly names the Federal Reserve to review the current access framework for payment accounts and payment services, studying how to allow non-bank financial institutions, including cryptocurrency enterprises, to obtain access qualifications. However, in the public information, all phrasing stops at “review,” “evaluate,” and “study how to allow access,” lacking any rigid commands for terms such as “must open immediately” or “must grant primary accounts.” In other words, this is a document that urges regulatory agencies through a presidential executive directive to reinterpret and rearrange the priorities of existing rules; it itself does not amend any piece of congressional legislation nor does it directly make case-by-case decisions for the Federal Reserve to grant accounts. Whether it can truly open any doors depends entirely on how specific the details of “review” and “research” become in the following months for each agency, particularly for the Federal Reserve itself.

Locked Out for Years: Why Cryptocurrency Companies Are Eyeing the Payment Hub

Before this executive order, cryptocurrency companies could only touch the periphery of the dollar payment system. They bypassed the federal level, turning to state-level breakthroughs — some states, represented by Wyoming, introduced charters for special purpose depository institutions (SPDI) that offered cryptocurrency companies a “quasi-bank” identity. Certain companies, including Kraken, have applied for Federal Reserve primary accounts using SPDI identities, hoping to transition from being “clients of banks” to “clients of clients of the Federal Reserve,” at least standing one level above the clearing chain. But the reality has been quite frigid: relevant applications have lingered for long periods in the review stage, triggering rounds of legal disputes in U.S. courts and regulatory processes regarding whether and how non-banks should enter the hub, making the path from state charter to federal primary account unpassable.

The reason for investing in time and litigation costs is that the Federal Reserve’s payment accounts and services represent triple resources for cryptocurrency companies: first, lower-cost and higher-efficiency dollar payments and clearing that no longer rely entirely on traditional banks' nested accounts and business hours; second, dollar funds can circulate within the official U.S. payment system in a closed-loop manner, reducing friction across institutions and jurisdictions; third, it is closer to being viewed as part of financial infrastructure compliance, rather than perpetually classified into high-risk fringe businesses. Because all previous attempts at access have progressed slowly and encountered continuous disputes, this presidential executive order is seen as a milestone transition from “case-by-case barriers” to “rules being forced to answer,” marking the first systematic demand for the Federal Reserve to evaluate the possibility of opening payment accounts to non-bank financial institutions, including cryptocurrency companies, at the federal level.

One Foot on the Gas and One Foot on the Brake: The Tug-of-War Between Innovation and Risk Control

From the framework relayed by multiple media, the first signal released by this executive order is “to open the door a little.” The policy goals summarized in the research briefing are straightforward: to simplify regulatory processes, eliminate “unnecessary” barriers to entry, and to encourage closer cooperation between fintech companies and federally regulated financial institutions, forcing regulatory agencies to proactively conduct a round of health checks to identify which terms objectively constitute “unreasonable” or “overly obstructive,” rather than allowing banks’ compliance departments to shut the door with a single statement of “too troublesome.” For cryptocurrency enterprises that have lingered on the periphery of the dollar clearing system, this feels like an invitation: if they are willing to pursue the federal regulatory path, at least procedurally, they will no longer be indiscriminately barred at the door.

However, the second signal from the same order is “the brake that absolutely doesn’t let go.” The order does not touch on hard constraints like anti-money laundering or anti-terror financing; it merely requires identifying which regulations are too vague or overly punitive to innovation. Simultaneously, in the past few years, agencies like the U.S. Treasury, FinCEN, and SEC have repeatedly emphasized in public statements and enforcement actions that cryptocurrency activities must be fully included in the anti-money laundering framework such as the Bank Secrecy Act (BSA), and this line has not only not retreated, but has been continually reinforced. Under this context, understanding “discussing access to open payment accounts” is not about carving out a regulatory enclave for the cryptocurrency industry; rather, it seems to be pushing businesses that were originally on the fringes of the system towards a center with clearer processes but stricter compliance requirements — the real change is not lighter regulation, but rather that if cryptocurrency businesses want to touch the doorknob of the dollar payment system, they must accept the premise of being fully illuminated under traditional financial compliance.

The Key Lies in the Federal Reserve's Attitude: Is It Allowing or Dragging Its Feet

The issue is that the Federal Reserve truly holds the key. Even if the White House has already named in the executive order to require it to “review the existing framework” and “study how to allow” non-bank financial institutions to access payment accounts and services, the text lacks any coercive wording such as “must grant accounts to certain types of institutions.” Following the traditional U.S. constitutional and administrative law practices, the president can set directions and timelines, but how specific and strict the rules are written are left to the Federal Reserve, which has a certain degree of independence, meaning it holds significant discretion over whether to accept and to what extent.

From the lengthy reviews and legal disputes regarding non-bank institutions’ applications for primary accounts and access to payment systems in the past, the Federal Reserve has always been conservative and meticulous in its processes regarding such matters. Applying this to the current order, the most realistic scenario is likely not “immediately turning on the green light,” but rather “executing per minimum requirements”: formally completing the review within three months and the action response within six months, while setting high thresholds in technical details, or conducting a few pilot projects under extremely stringent conditions, then managing the pace tightly by tiering access and classification for different types of non-bank institutions. For cryptocurrency companies, this order feels more like being allowed to participate in a qualifying contest than having already received a ticket to the finals; the market should not simply regard it as a linear and inevitable positive signal but should closely watch over the next few months whether the Federal Reserve is genuinely opening the door or merely using the process to waste time.

Countdown to Six Months: Can Cryptocurrency Break Into the Heart of Dollar Payments

From the timeline, the next three to six months will be the true course of this “qualifying contest”: first, we’ll see in three months how the relevant agencies define “overly obstructive” in the review reports and whether they name existing cryptocurrency business models, and then we’ll see whether the Federal Reserve provides the evaluation conclusion regarding non-bank payment account access as required by the order before and after the six-month mark, and whether it will simultaneously release a public consultation draft that outlines technical thresholds, capital requirements, and compliance responsibilities in institutional texts. Right now it is May 20, 2026, just one day after the order was signed, and all reviews are still at the starting line. This means that the current prices reflect more the expectation of “the federal opening the door” rather than any existing rights of access. It can be predicted that even if this door is pushed open, it will likely remain at a highly uncertain “intermediate state”—neither fully open nor simply vetoed, but controlled by the regulators through tiered standards and limited access. For investors, the real focus should not be on the “favorable regulatory signals” in the headlines but rather on each regulatory report, every statement by the Federal Reserve, and every accompanying rule in detail over the next six months concerning where cryptocurrency companies will be positioned.

Join our community, let’s discuss together, and become stronger together!
Official Telegram community: https://t.me/aicoincn
AiCoin English Twitter: https://x.com/AiCoinzh
OKX Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=l61eM4owQ
Binance Benefits Group: https://aicoin.com/link/chat?cid=ynr7d1P6Z

免责声明：本文章仅代表作者个人观点，不代表本平台的立场和观点。本文章仅供信息分享，不构成对任何人的任何投资建议。用户与作者之间的任何争议，与本平台无关。如网页中刊载的文章或图片涉及侵权，请提供相关的权利证明和身份证明发送邮件到support@aicoin.com，本平台相关工作人员将会进行核查。