Uniswap, a16z, and allies urge Senate to protect DeFi developers in market-structure bill

The DeFi Education Fund (DEF), a pro-crypto lobbying group initially funded by a grant from the Uniswap DAO, urged the Senate Banking Committee to carefully consider how it regulates DeFi in new comments co-signed by many major crypto firms. 

The comments come in response to a request for information from the Senate Banking Committee, which is discussing a draft version of the Responsible Financial Innovation Act of 2025 (RFIA), an updated version of prior Senate crypto market legislation considered in June 2022. The committee asked for responses to the draft legislation, in order to "ensure that the legislation effectively builds on the solid base established by the CLARITY Act to encourage innovation in the United States without risking financial stability or harming consumers." 

The DEF's response, co-signed by a16z Crypto, Jito Labs, Jump Crypto, Paradigm, Multicoin Capital, Solana Policy Institute, Uniswap Foundation, Uniswap Labs, and Variant Fund, argues that four key goals should guide the legislation: a distinction between DeFi developers and centralized intermediaries, clear definitions for those intermediaries who are required to register with the government, criteria to determine if a protocol is decentralized, and technology-neutral regulation. 

The comments also call for legislation to update FinCEN guidance that forms a key part of the current trial of Tornado Cash developer Roman Storm, who the Department of Justice argues violated federal laws by publishing code used by bad actors, including the hacking collective Lazarus Group. "The rulemaking should reflect that technology that solely consists of non-custodial, non-controlling software shall not be regulated as a financial institution or financial intermediary," the DEF writes. (Storm's verdict is expected as early as next week.)

The comments also call for the Senate to federally preempt state laws in protecting developers. "Absent federal preemption, well-resourced traditional financial institutions may exploit the fragmented regulatory landscape by funding or encouraging state-level enforcement actions against DeFi developers — not to protect consumers, but to stifle competition," the DEF writes.