Opinion of: Margaret Rosenfeld, chief executive officer of Everstake
The recent recent directive of the Federal Housing Finance Agency (FHFA) to explore how cryptocurrency could be included in unified mortgage risk assessments is a welcome and long-awaited step.
If it is implemented, it could allow long -term crypto holders to use their digital assets when they qualify for a mortgage without having to liquidate them.
To make its potential, the resulting proposals must reflect the functioning of the crypto. And this means recognizing the legitimacy of self-déracinated digital assets.
Misinterpret the FHFA directive
Some have already read the directive requiring the crypto to be kept on an exchange regulated by the United States to count. It would be a serious error – and unlike the gross text of the directive.
“Digital assets … must be able to be highlighted and stored on a centralized exchange regulated by the United States subject to all applicable laws.”
The expression “capable of being stored” is clear. The directive requests that assets be checked and managed in complete safety via infrastructure regulated by the United States, and not for the prohibition of assets held elsewhere. Verifiability must be the standard, not a specific guard model.
The Safety Affair for Auto-Coir
Auto-leather is not a marginal crypto activity. It is the foundation of system architecture and security. Compared to centralized exchanges, well-managed self -guard can offer superior transparency, auditability and protection. The collapses of the main goalkeepers and centralized exchanges have shown how real the risk of counterpart can be.
The properly documented and self -proclaimed assets can be fully verifiable, as onchain recordings demonstrate balance and property. They also offer a higher level of safety, as cold storage and non -guardian wallets reduce unique failure points. In addition, auto-control assets are verifiable, with third-party tools already available to attest to portfolio holders and transactions history.
If decision-makers exclude these assets from mortgage subscription simply because they are not Garden exchanges, they may encourage less secure practices and penalize users to properly make cryptography.
A framework that supports innovation
There is a better path. Any mortgage frame Sound Crypto should allow both self-déracinated and guardian assets, provided that they meet verifiability and liquidity standards. It should also apply the appropriate evaluation discounts (haircuts) to take into account volatility.
Another key requirement is to limit the share of crypto of total reserves using a several level -based approach.
In relation: The American regulator orders Fannie MAE, Freddie Mac to consider crypto for mortgage
Finally, it should force the clear documentation of verification and price methods, whatever the type of guard. This thought is already applied to volatile assets such as actions, foreign currencies and even private actions. The crypto should not be treated differently.
Do not force crypto in obsolete models
This directive has the potential to modernize housing financing in the digital age. However, he must avoid the trap of forcing crypto to imitate traditional models just to be understood.
We do not need to flatten decentralization to adapt to old risk boxes. We just need smart means to check it. Let’s go well, not only for crypto holders, but also for the integrity of the mortgage system itself.
This is only an example of a broader challenge confronted with a new cryptography policy. From tax reports to the classification of securities, too many rules are written by assuming that all users are based on centralized intermediaries. Millions of participants choose self -sufficiency or decentralized platforms because they appreciate transparency, autonomy, lack of traditional intermediaries and security. Others prefer regulated guards whom centralization offers.
The two models are legitimate and any effective regulatory framework must recognize that users will continue to require different options.
A more technical training on decentralized technology is essential to fill this gap. Decision-makers and regulators need a deeper understanding of the functioning of decentralization, reasons why self-care and what tools exist to check the property without counting on third parties.
Without this foundation, future directives, declarations, regulations and legislation may repeat the same error, which neglects the major segments of the ecosystem and does not take into account the entire range of participants in the cryptographic industry.
Opinion of: Margaret Rosenfeld, legal chief of Evestake.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and must not be considered as legal or investment advice. The points of view, the thoughts and opinions expressed here are the only of the author and do not reflect or do not necessarily represent the opinions and opinions of Cointellegraph.
