The recent one Cripto Weekwhich promoted the price of Bitcoin above the $ 120,000, fueled the investment enthusiasm after the approval of key laws in the United States such as the Genius Act, Clarity Act and the Anti-CBDC Surveillance Law. Beyond these regulations, it is crucial to analyze how Bitcoin is positioned in the new financial order compared to other digital assets such as tokens, stablecoins and NFTS.
Legislators are still not clear about their classification: Is it money, Security or Commodity? The answer is no! Bitcoin does not fit in any of these categories. What is clear is that it represents the first native, non -financial digital asset, in the history of humanity: scarce (maximum 21 million), transferable, safe, without fractional reserve and completely decentralized.
What is new and disruptive in financial services since 2009?
Beyond the native digital monetary or active unit that represents Bitcoin, the true innovation lies in the protocol and the decentralized blockchain network created that year under the pseudonym of Satoshi Nakamoto.
The term blockchain arises after the birth of Bitcoin, to describe the set of technologies that make it possible: a public accounting book, immutable and distributed. Each node of the network validates transactions, prevents double expense and eliminates intermediaries, decentralizing power. So far, we have all learned this lesson.
I remember a master class of the teacher of the IE and Digit Institute, Juan Elorduy, who points out that to understand the evolution of money it is essential to recognize the singularities and disruption that Bitcoin and the blockchain 1.0 represent.
The complexity and acceptance of this technology come to this day. The expert emphasizes that the IMF first mentions Bitcoin and the Crypto Assets in 2025, at the Integrated Balance of Payments and International Investment Manual Position. The organism describes Bitcoin as a «electronic money token», underlining its function as electronic money and the impact of digital assets on the modern economy.
Does the IMF recognize the evolution of the global financial system? By including Bitcoin in his dialectic, he opens the door for him to become an actor capable of influencing the world economy, international finances and monetary policies.
The regulatory paradox: the change of language
Next to Elorduy, I analyze the American stage and the recent Crypto Week. Surprisingly, in the documents of the House Committee on Financial Services, the term «Crypto Asset», nor «bitcoin» – the main «Crypto Asset» of the world does not appear once. Instead, other terms such as «Digital Asset» (31), «Stablecoin» (8), «CBDC» (11) and, of course, «legislation» (22) stand out.
Seeing Digital Asset (31) and Crypto Asset (0), could it be that we have some ambiguity with the meaning of these two terms? «I think there is confusion,» explains the expert. We enter the regulatory paradox.
With the advancement of normative frameworks such as Genius Act, Clarity Act and the Anti-CBDC Surveillance Law in the United States, the doubt arises: are we leaving behind the term «crypt»? Is it a simple semantic turn or strategic omission?
The American regulatory narrative has taken a turn: now there is talk of «digital ASSET.» Elorduy summarizes it clearly: «It is a digital value of value – such as a dollar, a euro, an ounce of gold, a barrel of oil, a film entrance or a casino card – that operates on a blockchain platform.» Could this semantic amplitude contribute to build a more solid and flexible legal framework?
Bitcoin, excluded or included in regulation?
«Digital Asset» sounds more institutional than «Crypto Asset», a term that still loads with the shadow of the scams and the lack of supervision, explains Cristina Carrascosa, an expert in cryptoactive regulation and founder of ATH21. «Five years ago we talked about crypto. They were the first steps of secondary markets; the concepts were technical and, in addition, they were associated with Scams (fraud). But digital assets cover much more.»
Bitcoin, as an active counterpart – that is, without an entity broadcast behind – raises a unique challenge for regulators. Its value depends solely on supply, demand and collective trust. However, his absence in official language during Crypto Week has generated concerns.
And I continue with a rosary of questions: can Bitcoin lead this transition if the legal framework ignores it? Despite its prominence in the market, it has been omitted from the legislative debate. Elder’s last lesson: this is not accidental. «Bitcoin does not easily fit in any regulatory category. It does not represent debt or participation, and that bothers regulators.»
In the doubt of whether Bitcoin’s absence in the legislative debate is a strategic omission or a form of exclusion, Carrascosa replies: “I think it is neither. It is a sign of inclusion. In the conversations to write mica, Bitcoin was not treated separate Incentives or as a value reserve, but at the regulatory level it should not be different.
Although regulatory language evolves, structural challenges persist: legal ambiguity, normative fragmentation and the dilemma of how to regulate what was born, precisely, not to depend on anyone. Maybe that’s why Bitcoin – without being named, but omnipresent – continues as the invisible axis of the debate.
I remember then the firm convictions of Michael Saylor: «Bitcoin is the active with the least entropy; that is, the one that changed or degrades over time in terms of value or trust.» It is digital gold: scarce, inflation resistant and limited. The most immune asset to corruption, thanks to a transparent and decentralized protocol.
In contrast, Warren Buffett told his partner Charlie Muger: «Bitcoin is an asset that produces nothing. It does not generate dividends, it does not produce income, it has no productive value. It is a purely speculative investment.»
From fear of the frame: the laws that reconfigure the ecosystem
In this new scenario, the United States has taken firm steps with three key laws: Genius Act, Clarity Act and the Anti-CBDC Surveillance Law. The first – the most ambitious – forces the stablecoins to be 100% backed by US dollars or bonds, audited periodically and with funds guarded within the country. The objective: convert them into legal, safe and fully traceable digital money. The Genius Act Stablcoins are not «crypt» at all. They are the tokenization of the dollar.
The emitters must maintain reservations equivalent to 100% of the value of the stablecoins in circulation. According to an analysis by Standard Chartered, the volume of Stablecoins could be multiplied by eight and reach the 2 billion dollars, consolidating the United States as an undisputed leader of digital financial geopolitics.
Carlos Fuenmayor, editor at Citywire specialized in AI, Blockchain and Crypto, says Genius Act and Clarity Act are redefining the game board for blockchain and the crypto -ipo. «Genius Act reinforces the supremacy of the dollar in the digital age, a clear message against the euro and the Yuan Digital. At the same time, it opens new horizons for developers on a clear and robust legal basis.»
The Clarity Act, going beyond the Howey Test, clears the great ambiguity that until now has marked the classification of digital assets, by accurately defining tokens as «digital products» or «values.» In addition, it establishes a clear separation of competences: the CFTC will regulate the tokens considered digital commodities, while the SEC will supervise those classified as values. «This can attract Blockchain developers again who were exiled to jurisdictions such as Singapore or Switzerland,» Matiza Fuenmayor.
In this context, Carrascosa warns: “The Clarity Act distinguishes between financial and utilitarian tokens using a somewhat peculiar criterion: the level of technological maturity. This depends on the degree of decentralization of the asset, which does not provide legal certainty, but also subtracts it. No?». This ambiguity shows that there is still much to advance in the regulation of digital assets.
Europe and the US: Regulatory approaches in competition
Europe assumed regulatory leadership with Mica, seeking to protect the consumer, while legislative advances under the philosophy «America First» show that the US administration has gone from distrust of the active promotion of digital assets. It is the Trump doctrine in action: a movement towards world supremacy. It remains to be seen who will cold on this geopolitical board of power with the digital Assets.
The US advances in the legal framework of digital assets, but rejects the creation of a Central Bank digital currency. Jerome Powell, president of the Federal Reserve, has been clear and forceful: «The Fed will not issue a Central Bank digital currency (CBDC).»
Regulation should not seek to prohibit or limit innovation, but rather control its specific uses and applications. That is precisely what Europe is doing, establishing a global standard.
In this sense, Carrascosa points out: «If a digital asset is used as a financial instrument, it must strictly submit to Mifid. But it is a useful token, such as those that drive incentives and dynamics within video games, then legitimately enters under the framework of Mica.» We cannot allow generic regulations that suffocate the disruptive potential: it is necessary to regulate with intelligence, differentiating and protecting real innovation.
Will we see more innovation with blockchain?
When asking an AI, what is the best blockchain project after Bitcoin? The most recurring answer is Ethereum. Its ability to execute intelligent contracts and decentralized applications (DAPPS) has resulted in a vibrant and constantly evolving ecosystem. Solana, Cardano or Polkadot also stand out, with unique proposals focused on scalability, interoperability or energy efficiency.
But what concrete improvement is blockchain for the citizens of the world? In essence, it represents an engine of trust by automating processes, guaranteeing traceability and allowing, for example, asset token, reduces friction and returns control to users. Blockchain’s promise is disintermediation in key sectors such as finance, logistics or public records.
Today we talk about blockchain as a structuring technology: it is not only a technical innovation, but a force that is redrawing the global financial map. Andreas Antonopoulos explains that only open and decentralized networks truly comply with the original vision. Even so, the road is not exempt from challenges. Private models or public blockchains proliferate with permits, whose utility will depend on its ability to generate real use cases, especially in the field of decentralized finances (DEFI).