The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
H.R. 10357·119th Congress·Introduced Sep 14, 2026

Digital Asset Tax Certainty Act

IntroducedTaxationOmnibus
View bill text
Sponsor
Rep. Smith, Jason [R-MO-8]
Committees
Ways and Means Committee (primary)
Last action
Sep 16, 2026

Bottom line

The bill aims to provide clarity and certainty for digital asset taxation, reduce compliance burdens for everyday users, and apply traditional financial asset tax rules to the digital asset space, while also including an unrelated provision on wagering losses.

What it actually does

This bill comprehensively reforms the tax treatment of digital assets under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986. It introduces new definitions for various types of digital assets, establishes de minimis exceptions for small transaction fees, simplifies accounting for widely traded digital assets, clarifies the treatment of stablecoins, and applies existing anti-abuse rules (like wash sales and constructive sales) to digital assets. It also addresses the tax treatment of mining and staking income, updates broker reporting requirements, and creates a voluntary disclosure program for past digital asset tax violations. Additionally, it includes a provision unrelated to digital assets that reinstates prior rules for wagering losses.

Proponents argue

Proponents argue that the current tax code is ill-suited for digital assets, creating significant uncertainty and compliance burdens for individuals and businesses. This bill provides much-needed clarity, streamlines reporting, and ensures that digital assets are treated consistently with comparable traditional financial assets, fostering innovation and adoption in the digital economy. They also highlight the importance of the voluntary disclosure program to bring past non-compliance into the tax system.

Opponents contend

Critics may argue that the bill's extensive carve-outs and simplified accounting methods could create loopholes or reduce tax revenue, particularly if the definitions of 'widely traded' or 'de minimis' are too broad. Some might also contend that the bill doesn't go far enough in addressing the unique challenges of digital asset taxation or that certain provisions, like the wagering loss rule, are unrelated riders that should be debated separately.

The bill is moderately long and highly technical, requiring significant time for a detailed review, especially for those unfamiliar with tax law and digital asset concepts. The estimated reading time is substantial compared to the typical time given for public review of complex legislation.

Sec. 101, Title I

De Minimis Digital Asset Fee Exception

prominently featuredmoderately complex

This section introduces a new tax exemption for small fees paid in digital assets. Specifically, no gain or loss will be recognized on the disposition of a digital asset used to pay a 'de minimis network fee' or a 'de minimis transaction fee,' each capped at $10 per transaction. This aims to reduce the tax burden and complexity for everyday digital asset users who incur small fees for network validation or trading services. The exemption does not apply to professional traders or those with high transaction volumes, nor to assets already subject to mark-to-market accounting.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupIndividual digital asset usersImpactReduced tax compliance burdenMechanismExemption from gain/loss recognition for small feesScaleSmall, per-transaction
GroupDigital asset traders, brokers, and dealersImpactNo change in tax treatmentMechanismExplicit exclusion from the de minimis exceptionScaleN/A

Supporters argue

Supporters argue this provision is essential for enabling digital assets to function as a medium of exchange. Requiring users to track and report gain or loss on every tiny transaction fee creates an insurmountable compliance burden, hindering mainstream adoption. This de minimis rule aligns with practical use cases.

Critics contend

Critics might contend that any exemption, however small, could lead to revenue loss or create opportunities for abuse if not carefully monitored. They may also argue that the $10 threshold could be too high or too low, depending on the volatility of digital assets.

Tradeoffs

The provision balances the desire to reduce compliance burdens for small transactions against the need to maintain tax integrity and prevent abuse by professional traders. It also navigates the administrative challenge of tracking micro-transactions versus the potential for revenue leakage.

Sec. 102, Title I

Simplified Accounting for Widely Traded Digital Assets

prominently featuredhighly complex

This section allows taxpayers to elect a simplified mark-to-market accounting method for 'widely traded digital assets.' Instead of tracking individual basis and gain/loss for each transaction, taxpayers would recognize annual gain or loss based on the net change in value of their holdings of a designated type of digital asset, plus net proceeds from sales/exchanges. All such gains and losses would be treated as short-term capital gains or losses. This aims to significantly reduce the complexity of tracking numerous transactions for highly liquid digital assets.

Sec. 103, Title I

Treatment of U.S. Dollar Stablecoin Transactions

prominently featuredmoderately complex

This section provides special tax rules for 'qualified U.S. dollar stablecoins.' It generally treats the basis and value of these stablecoins as their redemption value (i.e., $1 per stablecoin) for tax purposes, provided their market value remains within a narrow band (99.5% to 100.5%) of that redemption value. This means that minor fluctuations in stablecoin value would not trigger taxable gain or loss, effectively treating them more like cash for tax purposes. Exceptions apply to professional traders and high-volume transactors.

Sec. 201, Title II

Transfers of Traded Digital Assets Pursuant to a Lending Agreement

mentioned in summarymoderately complex

This section extends the nonrecognition rules of Section 1058 of the Internal Revenue Code, which currently apply to securities lending agreements, to 'traded digital assets.' This means that transfers of traded digital assets under certain lending agreements (where the transferor receives substantially identical assets back and is compensated for any income earned) would not be treated as taxable sales or exchanges. This aims to provide tax parity between digital asset lending and traditional securities lending.

Sec. 202, Title II

Mark-to-Market Election for Dealers and Traders in Covered Digital Assets

prominently featuredhighly complex

This section amends Section 475 to allow dealers and traders in 'covered digital assets' to elect mark-to-market accounting. This means they would recognize gain or loss on their holdings at the end of each taxable year, as if the assets were sold at fair market value, rather than waiting for actual disposition. This aligns their tax treatment with that of securities dealers and traders, providing a more accurate reflection of their economic income and reducing complexity for high-volume activities. 'Covered digital assets' include widely traded digital assets, stablecoins, pool tokens, and certain derivatives or hedges.

Sec. 203, Title II

Digital Asset Trading Safe Harbor

mentioned in summarymoderately complex

This section amends Section 864(b)(2) to create a safe harbor for foreign persons trading 'traded digital assets' in the United States. Similar to existing safe harbors for securities and commodities, this provision specifies that trading in traded digital assets through a U.S. broker or for a taxpayer's own account (unless a dealer) will not be considered engaging in a U.S. trade or business. This helps clarify that foreign investors' digital asset trading activities in the U.S. will not automatically subject them to U.S. income tax on those gains.

Sec. 204, Title II

Charitable Contributions of Certain Digital Assets

mentioned in summaryhighly complex

This section makes several changes to the rules for charitable contributions of digital assets. First, it exempts 'qualified U.S. dollar stablecoins' and 'widely traded digital assets' from the appraisal requirement for noncash contributions, similar to publicly traded securities. Second, it disallows deductions for contributions of 'conversion eligible digital assets' (a residual category of digital assets) but allows for nonrecognition of gain if these assets are sold or exchanged for stablecoins and the proceeds are contributed to charity within 7 days or by year-end. This aims to facilitate charitable giving of digital assets while preventing abuse.

Sec. 301, Title III

Application of Wash Sale Rules to Traded Digital Assets

prominently featuredmoderately complex

This section extends the wash sale rules (Section 1091) to 'traded digital assets' (excluding qualified U.S. dollar stablecoins). The wash sale rule prevents taxpayers from deducting a loss on the sale of an asset if they acquire a 'substantially identical' asset within 30 days before or after the sale. This amendment aims to prevent taxpayers from artificially generating tax losses by selling digital assets and immediately repurchasing them. It also includes special rules for tokenized digital assets and an exception for assets acquired in connection with validation activities or as ordinary income.

Sec. 302, Title III

Application of Constructive Sale Rules to Digital Assets

mentioned in summaryhighly complex

This section extends the constructive sale rules (Section 1259) to digital assets (excluding qualified U.S. dollar stablecoins). Constructive sale rules prevent taxpayers from avoiding capital gains tax by entering into transactions that eliminate their risk of loss and opportunity for gain on an appreciated position, without actually selling the asset. This amendment ensures that such 'hedging' transactions involving digital assets are treated as taxable events, preventing tax deferral or conversion of short-term gains to long-term gains.

Sec. 303, Title III

Application of Subpart F and PFIC Rules to Digital Assets

mentioned in summaryhighly complex

This section amends Subpart F of the Internal Revenue Code to include digital assets as 'passive assets' for purposes of determining Subpart F income and Passive Foreign Investment Company (PFIC) status. This means that income from digital assets held by controlled foreign corporations (CFCs) or PFICs would generally be treated as passive income, subject to immediate U.S. taxation for U.S. shareholders. It also introduces specific rules for 'passive digital asset validation supporting income' and payments from digital asset lending agreements, with an exception for active dealers in covered digital assets.

Sec. 304, Title III

Rules Related to Possessions for Determining Source of Gain or Loss on Disposition of Traded Digital Assets

mentioned in summaryhighly complex

This section introduces special source rules for gains on the disposition of 'traded digital asset property' by 'specified possession resident individuals' (U.S. citizens who become bona fide residents of U.S. territories like Puerto Rico or Guam). Generally, such gains would be sourced within the U.S., unless the individual provides specific information and demonstrates that the gain is attributable to value increases while a bona fide resident of the possession. An election is also provided for widely traded digital assets to mark them to market upon becoming a possession resident, after which subsequent gains would be sourced in the possession.

Sec. 305, Title III

Application of Registration-Required Obligation Rules

buried in fine printmoderately complex

This section clarifies the application of registration-required obligation rules (Sections 163(f) and 4701) to digital assets. It exempts 'qualified U.S. dollar stablecoins' from the rules that deny deductions for interest on unregistered obligations, effectively treating them as if they were registered. For other digital assets, it clarifies that disclosure statements can be included in written terms or marketing materials, and for digital assets without a fixed maturity date, the maturity date is deemed to be 25 years after issuance. This aims to adapt existing rules for debt instruments to the digital asset context.

Sec. 306, Title III

Certain Rules Related to Character of Gains and Losses Relating to Digital Assets

mentioned in summarymoderately complex

This section modifies rules related to the character of gains and losses for digital assets. It extends the worthless asset rules (Section 165) to digital assets (excluding certain tokenized securities), treating a loss from a worthless digital asset as a loss from a sale or exchange on the last day of the taxable year. It also expands the definition of 'specified asset futures contract' (Section 1234B) to include futures contracts in digital assets, ensuring that gains and losses from these contracts are treated consistently with securities futures contracts.

Sec. 307, Title III

Miscellaneous Provisions for Digital Assets

buried in fine printhighly complex

This section includes several diverse amendments: (1) 'Traded digital assets' are generally treated as 'marketable securities' for partnership distribution rules (Section 731(c)), meaning their distribution can trigger gain recognition. 'Specified stablecoins' are treated as 'money' for these rules. (2) 'Traded digital assets' are included in the definition of 'investment company' assets (Section 351(e)), impacting tax-free incorporation rules. (3) 'Specified stablecoin lending' is generally treated as 'indebtedness' (Section 1289), with payments treated as interest. (4) Digital assets are generally excluded from 'Section 197 intangibles' (Section 197(e)), impacting amortization. (5) 'Traded digital assets' are included in the definition of 'personal property' for straddle rules (Section 1092(d)). (6) Rules for backup withholding are provided for 'illiquid digital assets' paid for validation activities.

Sec. 401, Title IV

Source and Character of Mining and Staking Income

prominently featuredmoderately complex

This section clarifies that income from 'digital asset validation supporting activities' (mining and staking) is treated as ordinary income. It also establishes source rules for this income: generally sourced in the United States for U.S. residents and outside the U.S. for nonresidents. Special rules apply for foreign and U.S. branches of businesses, allowing for income attribution based on the location of the qualified business unit or fixed place of business. This aims to provide clarity on how income from these activities is taxed and where it is considered to originate.

Sec. 402, Title IV

Investment Trusts Engaged in Digital Asset Staking

mentioned in summarymoderately complex

This section clarifies that an entity or arrangement will not fail to be treated as a trust for tax purposes solely because its trustee engages in staking digital assets held by the trust. This includes powers to retain or distribute staking rewards, determine which assets to stake, and ensure liquidity for redemptions. This provision aims to provide certainty for investment vehicles, such as digital asset exchange-traded funds (ETFs) or similar trusts, that engage in staking activities, preventing them from being reclassified as corporations for tax purposes. It explicitly excludes entities engaged in the active conduct of a validating trade or business.

Sec. 501, Title V

Broker Requirements for Digital Assets

prominently featuredhighly complex

This section amends broker reporting requirements (Section 6045) for digital assets. It clarifies that 'qualified U.S. dollar stablecoins' acquired at redemption value are generally exempt from certain reporting requirements, treating them more like cash. It also introduces special rules for digital assets used to pay de minimis fees (Section 1044), generally exempting these dispositions from reporting but requiring aggregate information. Furthermore, it provides special reporting rules for 'widely traded digital assets' subject to simplified accounting (Section 1051), requiring aggregate reporting of sales, acquisitions, and year-end holdings rather than individual transaction details.

Sec. 502, Title V

Establishment of Digital Asset Voluntary Disclosure Program

prominently featuredmoderately complex

This section mandates the establishment of a 'Digital Asset Voluntary Disclosure Program' by the Secretary of the Treasury within 12 months. This program will allow eligible taxpayers to come forward and correct past 'digital asset violations' (failures to comply with tax requirements related to digital assets). Taxpayers must file amended returns, pay deficiencies and interest, and a 'digital asset violation penalty.' In return, uncertified taxpayers receive protection from further penalties (Sections 6662, 6663) and criminal investigation (Sections 7201, 7203, 7206), while certified taxpayers (who attest to non-fraudulent/non-willful violations) receive protection from Section 6662 penalties.

Sec. 503, Title V

Treasury Study and Report on Digital Technologies for Tax Compliance

prominently featuredstraightforward

This section mandates the Secretary of the Treasury to conduct a study on the feasibility of using new digital technologies (like zero-knowledge proofs, smart contracts, and blockchain) for improved tax compliance, efficiency, and data protection related to digital asset transactions. The study must investigate how these technologies can reduce compliance costs, replace traditional reporting, improve administration, and enhance data security. It also requires an evaluation of current withholding rules for digital assets and recommendations for legislative changes. A report to Congress is due by September 30, 2028.

Sec. 601, Title VI

Definitions Related to Digital Assets

buried in fine printhighly complex

This section adds a new subsection (p) to Section 7701 of the Internal Revenue Code, establishing comprehensive definitions for key terms related to digital assets. These include 'digital asset,' 'traded digital asset,' 'widely traded digital asset,' 'tokenized digital asset,' 'wrapped digital asset,' 'reference digital asset,' 'stablecoin' (including 'qualified U.S. dollar stablecoin'), 'digital asset transaction,' 'digital asset validation supporting activities,' 'validation,' 'staking,' and 'mining.' These definitions are foundational for the entire bill, determining the scope and application of its various tax reforms.

Sec. 701, Title VII

Reinstatement of Rules for Wagering Losses

buried in fine printstraightforward

This section amends Section 165(d) of the Internal Revenue Code to reinstate prior rules for wagering losses. It specifies that losses from wagering transactions are allowed only to the extent of gains from such transactions, and crucially, that the term 'losses from wagering transactions' includes any deduction otherwise allowable under this chapter incurred in carrying on any wagering transaction. This reverses a change made by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, which had limited the deduction of expenses incurred in carrying on wagering transactions to the extent of gains.

FOUND

This section introduces a comprehensive set of new definitions for various digital asset types and related activities, including 'digital asset,' 'traded digital asset,' 'widely traded digital asset,' 'tokenized digital asset,' 'wrapped digital asset,' 'stablecoin,' 'staking,' and 'mining.' These definitions are fundamental to the application of nearly all other provisions in the bill.

Sec. 601, Title VI (Section 7701(p))

Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for defining terms that apply broadly across a bill. However, the sheer number and novelty of these definitions mean that their precise wording carries significant substantive weight for the entire digital asset tax framework.

Case for: Proponents argue that clear and comprehensive definitions are the bedrock of effective legislation, providing certainty and consistency for taxpayers and the IRS in a complex and evolving area.

Case against: Critics might argue that the broad authority granted to the Secretary to modify or specify these definitions (e.g., 'except as otherwise provided by the Secretary to prevent abuse') could lead to future uncertainty or administrative overreach.

Estimated impact: These definitions will fundamentally shape the tax treatment of all digital asset transactions and activities covered by the bill, impacting billions of dollars in potential tax liabilities and compliance costs.

FOUND

This section, titled 'Reinstatement of rules for wagering losses,' amends Section 165(d) of the Internal Revenue Code to specify that losses from wagering transactions, including any related deductions, are allowed only to the extent of gains from such transactions. This reverses a change made by the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017.

Sec. 701, Title VII

Why it matters:This is a clear example of a policy rider, likely included in this bill because it is a vehicle that is moving through Congress, rather than being able to pass as standalone legislation. Its inclusion allows a specific policy change to be enacted without direct debate on its merits in a dedicated bill.

Case for: Proponents of this specific tax rule argue it ensures that professional gamblers cannot use business expenses to offset non-gambling income, promoting tax fairness and preventing a perceived loophole.

Case against: Opponents argue that professional gamblers should be treated like any other business, allowing them to deduct all ordinary and necessary business expenses, even if they exceed income, to accurately reflect their economic profit or loss.

Estimated impact: This change would primarily affect professional gamblers and potentially the gaming industry, altering their tax liabilities and reporting requirements. The fiscal impact would depend on the volume of professional gambling losses and related deductions.

FOUND

This subsection introduces backup withholding rules for 'illiquid digital assets' paid for 'digital asset validation supporting activities.' If specified illiquid digital assets are transferred as payment, the payor is treated as having withheld if they hold the applicable percentage of assets, liquidate them within one business day after a fixed restriction period ends, and deposit the proceeds.

Sec. 307(f), Title III

Why it matters:This is a technical compliance mechanism designed to address a specific challenge: how to withhold tax on payments made in digital assets that cannot be immediately sold. Its technical nature and placement are typical for such detailed operational rules.

Case for: Proponents argue this is a practical solution to ensure tax compliance for payments made in illiquid digital assets, which are common in staking and mining, preventing tax evasion while acknowledging market realities.

Case against: Critics might argue that the mechanism is still complex for payors to implement, especially regarding the timing of liquidation and deposit, and could create administrative burdens for smaller entities engaged in validation activities.

Estimated impact: This provision would impact entities and individuals making or receiving payments in illiquid digital assets for mining or staking, ensuring that tax obligations are met even when assets are not immediately liquid.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Buried treasure
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
  • Implementation
  • Political analysis
  • Riders
  • Tactical maneuvers
  • Process critique
  • Transparency
Ask Ledger AI about this