U.S. Senators Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) and Jerry Moran (R-KS) introduced the bipartisan Strengthening Agency Frameworks for Enforcement of Cryptocurrency (SAFE Crypto) Act, often referred to as the SAFE Act.
The bill aims to combat the sharp rise in cryptocurrency-related fraud—Americans lost over $9.3 billion to such scams in 2024 alone, a 66% increase from the prior year, with seniors particularly vulnerable over $2.84 billion in losses for those aged 60+.
Key provisions include: Establishing a dedicated interagency task force led by the U.S. Department of the Treasury. Involving the FBI, FinCEN, Secret Service, other regulators, law enforcement (federal, state, and local), and private-sector stakeholders e.g., exchanges, custodians, blockchain intelligence firms, and victim representatives.
Focusing on identifying emerging scam trends, enhancing investigative tools for local law enforcement, improving public awareness and education, and coordinating real-time disruption of illicit networks using blockchain analytics.
Requiring annual reports to Congress on progress and threats. Supporters, including blockchain firm TRM Labs, argue it enables effective public-private collaboration to track and stop fraud without broadly regulating the crypto industry.
The bill is still in the early stages— introduced but not yet passed committees, and its narrow focus on fraud enforcement has drawn praise for addressing a clear bipartisan concern amid ongoing debates over wider crypto regulation.
The Strengthening Agency Frameworks for Enforcement of Cryptocurrency (SAFE Crypto) Act, introduced by Senators Elissa Slotkin (D-MI) and Jerry Moran (R-KS), is a narrowly focused bipartisan bill aimed at combating cryptocurrency fraud without imposing broad new regulations on the industry.
If enacted, it would establish an interagency task force led by the Treasury Department, including the FBI, FinCEN, Secret Service, other regulators, law enforcement, and private-sector participants e.g., blockchain analytics firms like TRM Labs and Chainalysis, exchanges, custodians, and victim advocates.
The task force would prioritize real-time identification and disruption of scams e.g., phishing, pig butchering, rug pulls, Ponzi schemes, which caused over $9.3 billion in U.S. losses in 2024 up 66% from prior year, including $2.84 billion for seniors.
Mandated public campaigns and tools for local law enforcement could reduce vulnerability, especially among older Americans and new users. Enhanced blockchain tracing and coordination might improve asset recovery rates, though crypto’s pseudonymous nature remains a challenge.
Addresses current silos—SEC/CFTC focus on securities/commodities fraud, but everyday scams (hacks, phishing) often fall through gaps. The task force fills this with shared intelligence and private-sector analytics.
Requires progress reports to Congress on threats and enforcement, increasing accountability and potentially securing more funding. Focuses on enforcement against illicit activity, not market structure or innovation.
For the Crypto Industry
Widely viewed as “quietly bullish” in community discussions. By targeting bad actors, it could clean up the space, build public trust, and pave the way for mainstream adoption/institutional investment. Supporters like TRM Labs praise public-private collaboration for disrupting illicit networks without stifling innovation.
Exchanges and custodians may face more scrutiny or voluntary data-sharing expectations, raising operational costs. Removing fraudulent elements could boost investor confidence, as noted in analyses—distinguishing scams from compliant assets.
Signals rare agreement on crypto amid polarized debates e.g., stablecoin rules via GENIUS Act, market structure bills like CLARITY/FIT21. Could pass more easily than comprehensive regulation. Critics worry about challenges like defining task force boundaries or international cooperation for cross-border scams. No major opposition reported yet—early reactions are supportive.
Reinforces U.S. shift toward targeted anti-fraud measures rather than blanket restrictions, aligning with pro-innovation trends under recent administrations. Its fraud-specific focus makes it less controversial than wider crypto bills, increasing passage odds.
Overall, implications lean positive: stronger safeguards against scams while supporting industry growth by enhancing legitimacy.






