Lede
The Bitcoin Policy Institute (BPI), in collaboration with Fedi and Cornell University, is initiating a two-year study designed to investigate how residents of the United States view financial privacy. This extensive research project is structured to connect the fundamental ways that privacy tools are built and researched with the methods by which they are ultimately governed. To achieve a detailed understanding of these dynamics, the study will utilize a methodology that combines quantitative surveys with qualitative interviews. This dual approach is intended to examine specific attitudes toward financial privacy and track how these perspectives evolve over the course of the multi-year study.
Cornell’s Brooks School Tech Policy Institute has joined the initiative as the official academic partner, ensuring a rigorous scholarly foundation for the work. By bringing together a Bitcoin wallet company, a policy think tank, and a major university, the project seeks to provide empirical evidence regarding the relationship between technological development and regulatory oversight. The two-year timeline allows for a deep dive into the nuances of public perception, providing a comprehensive framework for understanding the governance of privacy-enhancing technologies. Researchers hope the findings will illuminate the trade-offs Americans are willing to make regarding their financial data and how these views inform their interactions with emerging digital financial systems and tools.
Context
The launch of this study occurs against a backdrop of increasing regulatory pressure on privacy-preserving technologies in the crypto space. In recent years, US authorities have brought high-profile criminal cases against the developers of prominent non-custodial services, including Samourai Wallet and Tornado Cash. These legal actions were based on specific allegations that the developers operated unlicensed money-transmitting businesses and allowed their software to be used for the movement of illicit funds. The legal outcomes of these cases have been severe, with developers facing criminal convictions and multi-year prison sentences.
Others remain under significant ongoing liability risk, creating a climate of uncertainty for those building open-source code. This environment has raised fundamental questions about the legal status of developers who create privacy tools but do not maintain direct control over user funds. The study by BPI and Cornell arrives as the industry grapples with these enforcement actions, which suggest that publishing privacy-focused code could potentially be treated as a criminal act under current interpretations of money-transmission laws. Understanding public sentiment is increasingly seen as vital as the debate over the boundaries of financial surveillance and personal privacy intensifies within the United States legal system. The potential for prison sentences and the threat of ongoing liability have become central concerns for the developer community and the broader crypto ecosystem.
Impact
The intersection of privacy technology and regulation has become a central point of contention in legislative halls, particularly regarding the crypto market structure bill. This specific piece of legislation has emerged as a key battleground for the future of decentralized finance (DeFi) and the individuals who develop its underlying infrastructure. The debate centers on how much protection software developers should receive and whether non-custodial tools should be subject to the same regulatory requirements as traditional financial intermediaries. The outcomes of these policy discussions are expected to shape the future of financial software development in the United States.
Without clear safeguards, there are concerns that the regulatory climate could become increasingly hostile toward decentralized technologies and their creators. The ongoing battle over the market structure bill highlights the tension between the desire for regulatory oversight and the preservation of privacy-enhancing innovation. As the two-year study progresses, its findings may influence these policy discussions by providing a data-driven look at how citizens perceive the balance between privacy and security. The risk of multi-year prison sentences or heavy liability for developers underscores the high stakes involved in these legislative and legal battles over the nature of financial privacy and decentralized systems. The results of the research could ultimately impact how developers approach building tools for the US market.
Outlook
Over the next two years, the study led by the Bitcoin Policy Institute, Fedi, and Cornell University aims to provide a clearer roadmap for how financial privacy tools can be governed without stifling innovation. By connecting the research process directly to how tools are built, the initiative seeks to foster a more informed dialogue between technologists and policymakers. The project’s reliance on both qualitative and quantitative data will allow for a nuanced understanding of how American attitudes toward financial privacy might shift in response to new technologies and regulatory actions. This research comes at a time when the industry faces significant headwinds from both legal enforcement and legislative uncertainty.
As developers continue to face potential criminal convictions and liability risks for their contributions to privacy software, the need for empirical research into public expectations has never been greater. The study’s focus on the governance of these tools suggests an effort to move beyond the current confrontational climate and toward a framework that recognizes the role of privacy-enhancing technology in the digital age. Furthermore, the involvement of Cornell’s Brooks School Tech Policy Institute ensures that the academic rigor required for such a long-term project is maintained. As the crypto market structure bill continues to serve as a battleground for the future of DeFi, the insights generated by this two-year research project are expected to contribute to the broader understanding of how privacy should be governed and protected.
About the Author
