President Trump urgently enacts five changes to cryptocurrencies through executive order amid bureaucracy

A new report from Bloomberg suggests that President Trump intends to prioritize cryptocurrencies through an executive order. Details circulating among industry insiders suggest the measure could impact government agencies and shape enforcement across several digital asset areas.

However, due to checks and balances within the U.S. Constitution, there are limits to executive orders. President Trump is reportedly planning to implement the following policies through executive orders:

Designate cryptocurrencies as a national priority. Establish a Cryptocurrency Advisory Board. Directing government agencies to review their digital asset policies. Suspend or discontinue litigation against cryptocurrency companies. Create a national Bitcoin stockpile.

What does this mean? How much can he change with just an executive order?

According to Bloomberg’s anonymous sources, the draft order will declare cryptocurrencies a significant initiative and establish an advisory committee. The council fosters interagency cooperation but primarily issues recommendations rather than enacting binding regulations.

Presidential directives often rely on the Federal Advisory Committee Act, which requires transparency and public accountability when new advisory committees are established. Such steps typically face fewer legal hurdles and allow the executive branch to focus more broadly on crypto-related policy matters without having to wait for new legislation.

Another element being discussed is directing government agencies to review their regulatory and enforcement strategies regarding digital assets. Such internal audits and policy reviews, especially if they include the production of reports and recommendations, are well within normal executive powers.

Past administrations have adopted similar strategies to focus on emerging problems and encourage coordinated responses. Market participants hope that the official review could encourage a more consistent approach across the Treasury Department, Justice Department, and other organizations that oversee cryptocurrencies.

Some policies may be problematic to do via EO

But the proposal to halt lawsuits involving crypto companies represents a more controversial approach. Enforcement actions against industry participants, such as the SEC and CFTC, are based on powers that give these agencies a degree of independence.

Direct intervention may conflict with statutory obligations and established prosecutorial norms, raising concerns about judicial intervention. While the executive branch does have influence over the Justice Department, a directive to suspend ongoing cases would likely provoke widespread legal and political backlash.

The possibility of expanding the government’s Bitcoin stockpile remains under consideration, but is likely to face scrutiny from Congress. Existing laws typically direct the disposition or auction of seized assets, with funds transferred to government accounts or used for law enforcement activities.

Since budgets and appropriations are within the purview of Congress, accumulating long-term Bitcoin reserves calls into question the power of the wallet. Supporters say the stockpile is a strategic move, noting that the government already has about $20 billion worth of bitcoin seized through various investigations. Skeptics argue that given constitutional constraints on administrative spending, efforts to formalize these holdings would require explicit legal approval.

TLDR;

Certain actions, such as designating cryptocurrencies as a priority, establishing advisory bodies, and ordering government agencies to conduct reviews, fall within standard executive powers. Broader efforts, such as ending enforcement across independent agencies and creating a permanent Bitcoin reserve, lean toward issues that require cooperation from Congress. These distinctions may shape the scope of future orders and determine whether their impact extends beyond advisory measures to substantive regulatory changes.

Feasibility of Initiative EO Power Designate cryptocurrencies as a national priority Clearly Feasible Establish a Cryptocurrency Advisory Board Generally Feasible Direct government agencies to review digital asset policies Likely to Feasible Virtual Suspend or halt lawsuits against currency companies Legally questionable Create a national Bitcoin reserve stockpile Requires Congressional approval

Although the final document has not yet been released, officials are preparing guidelines that could redefine how the federal government interacts with the crypto industry as early as Monday, January 20.

Implementation will depend on existing agency frameworks and legal restrictions governing specific areas of executive or financial operations. Although the scope of the order remains unclear, clarifying the administration’s stance on digital assets could foster closer coordination between regulators and market participants.

mentioned in this article