For years, crypto largely operated outside the core plumbing of U.S. finance. Dollars still had to enter and exit exchanges through traditional banks, and many expected that arrangement to hold until Washington produced a comprehensive regulatory framework. That premise is starting to crack. In March 2026, a regional Federal Reserve bank approved a limited account for Kraken—marking the first time a crypto exchange has been permitted to connect directly to the Federal Reserve's payments infrastructure. More approvals could follow. Separately, the GENIUS Act, passed last year, created a workable federal framework for digital dollars and opened the door for conventional banks to issue their own tokenized versions. The shift did not require a single sweeping "crypto law". It has arrived through a string of narrower, technical moves that collectively change how crypto can interface with the banking system. What "direct access" to the Fed really changes The U.S. financial system relies on Federal Reserve-operated payment networks that banks use to transfer funds, settle daily activity, and access dollar liquidity. The centerpiece is Fedwire, which moves trillions of dollars between banks every day. Historically, using these rails required an account at the Fed—access typically limited to licensed banks. Firms outside that perimeter had to reach the system indirectly via a partner bank. Kraken's banking unit no longer needs that intermediary. With its own direct link into the Fed's payment system, it can settle dollar transactions on the same backbone used by banks. The account is "limited": it does not include interest on reserves or access to the Fed's emergency lending facilities. Even so, the practical impact is significant—fewer layers, less dependency on a sponsor bank that can restrict or withdraw service. Policy drift gives way to operational change U.S. crypto policy has advanced slowly, shaped by overlapping agencies and unresolved jurisdictional disputes. Institutional demand, though, has remained steady. Large investors have sought more standardized, regulated ways to interact with digital assets, and the system has begun adjusting through implementable steps. The GENIUS Act supplied the first credible federal rulebook for digital dollars and effectively encouraged regulated banks to participate. Regulators also issued special charters enabling nonbank firms such as Circle to operate with bank-like privileges. The Fed launched a public comment process around a lighter-weight account structure tailored to payment-focused firms. Wyoming's crypto-friendly bank charter—once viewed as a niche experiment—became the legal pathway that enabled Kraken's entry. For consumers and markets, the practical takeaway is that traditional banks' exposure to digital assets is likely to rise—through partnerships, new products, and potentially their own tokens. Citi has said it is targeting a 2026 launch of crypto custody. A consortium of major global banks, including JPMorgan, Bank of America, and Goldman Sachs, has explored a jointly backed digital dollar. Even for customers who never buy crypto, digital-asset infrastructure may increasingly sit adjacent to the accounts they already use. A tighter linkage also changes the risk profile Wider, shorter pipes between crypto and traditional finance can accelerate flows in both directions—and potentially speed up the transmission of shocks. For crypto, direct access to the payment system signals legitimacy that would have been difficult to imagine a few years ago. It also reduces crypto's distance from the regulated financial perimeter and brings greater expectations around controls and resilience. As integration increases, crypto risks become less isolated. Stability vs. contagion: the core disagreement Supporters of integration argue that pulling crypto inside the regulatory perimeter can reduce risk. Entities with direct Fed access face higher standards, reserves can be monitored more directly, and users may encounter fewer opaque intermediaries between their dollars and an exchange. Critics, including the U.S. banking lobby, frame the Kraken approval as a meaningful expansion of operational and compliance risk. They warn that lightly regulated firms with access to payment rails could increase money-laundering and operational vulnerabilities. Another concern is deposit flight: in a period of stress, funds could rush into these new accounts, draining deposits from community banks and credit unions that support the real economy. The Bank Policy Institute, representing the largest U.S. banks, said the approval occurred before the Fed Board completed its own rulebook for these account types. Beneath the debate is a single question: does bringing crypto into the system make the system stronger—or more fragile? Many observers argue that crises tend to emerge from unmodeled connections, and a direct linkage between crypto markets and Fed payment rails could become exactly that kind of transmission channel. A structural shift happening without an announcement The most consequential part may be how quietly the change is unfolding. There is no definitive moment when "crypto joins the banking system" because the transition is being built through incremental steps: a regional Fed approval, a stablecoin framework, a charter for a firm most Americans do not recognize. Each step can appear technocratic and low-profile, allowing progress that broader crypto legislation has struggled to achieve. Once the Fed finalizes its lighter-weight account framework, more crypto firms are likely to pursue similar approvals, granted district by district with conditions buried in extensive legal language. Large banks are expected to continue rolling out custody and digital-dollar initiatives as standard product launches rather than ideological statements. At the same time, the Kraken cybersecurity incident this spring—an extortion attempt involving insider access—provides fresh ammunition for critics who argue that lightly regulated firms should not operate on the same rails as JPMorgan. A comprehensive crypto market-structure law may still pass. Yet by the time it arrives, much of the system it aims to govern may already be in place, shifting the real question from what the rules say to how much of the infrastructure has learned to operate without waiting for them. The post Crypto to enter the US banking system through a backdoor, not through regulation appeared first on CryptoSlate.

The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission is signaling a more accommodating posture toward parts of the crypto market, while stopping short of endorsing the industry as a whole. Recent steps by the regulator focus on sharpening the line between which digital assets fall under federal securities laws and which may not, and on giving certain crypto-facing interfaces more operational breathing room without immediate broker-dealer registration. That nuance has prompted some market participants to characterize the shift as a new SEC "green light" for crypto. The SEC's own actions point to a narrower change: digital securities remain squarely within the scope of federal securities laws, and the agency continues to emphasize conditions, categories, and legal boundaries rather than broad approval. The development also aligns with a broader reset in the SEC's approach. Reuters reported that enforcement activity dropped sharply in fiscal 2025 as the agency moved to prioritize fraud, investor harm, and market integrity over pursuing large volumes of novel cases, including matters involving digital assets. SEC narrows stance on crypto interfaces On April 13, the SEC's Division of Trading and Markets issued a staff statement addressing certain user interfaces used in crypto asset securities transactions. The statement said staff would not object in some cases if an interface provider creates or operates the interface without registering as a broker-dealer. Commissioner Hester Peirce said the statement applies to front ends and self-custodial wallets used by investors in on-chain crypto asset securities transactions. The relief is limited and applies only to specific circumstances; it does not function as broad authorization for exchanges, token issuers, or the wider crypto market. Guidance emphasizes classification and compliance A larger policy shift arrived on March 17, when the SEC released long-awaited guidance on how federal securities laws apply to crypto assets. Reuters reported that the agency grouped tokens into categories including digital commodities, stablecoins, and digital securities, stating that securities laws apply only to digital securities. The guidance represents a notable change from the SEC's earlier, enforcement-driven posture, but it is framed as a classification and compliance effort rather than a universal approval for every token, project, or platform. A crypto asset may still be treated differently depending on how it is marketed, including whether it is promoted as an investment tied to profit expectations. Taken together, the SEC's latest moves are best read as improved regulatory clarity and a more workable pathway for specific segments of the crypto ecosystem, while key legal constraints remain in place.