Written by: FinTax
Summary
Entering 2026, the global crypto industry is undergoing structural changes. The Block, in its 2026 Digital Assets Outlook, identifies regulation, infrastructure, stablecoins, DeFi, and institutional participation as key factors shaping the industry’s evolution; Fidelity Digital Assets, under the theme “Structural Shifts Beyond Price,” argues that the focus of digital asset observation is shifting from mere asset price performance to liquidity structures, tokenization applications, and new technological infrastructure; PwC, in its Global Crypto Regulation Report 2026, further notes that stablecoins have become one of the central issues in global regulatory policy, with jurisdictions worldwide refining their regulatory frameworks around issuance eligibility, reserve assets, redemption arrangements, and ongoing oversight; Citi summarizes the evolution of stablecoins as a transition “from Web3 to Wall Street,” as stablecoin applications are gradually expanding from within crypto markets into traditional financial domains such as payments, banking, and corporate treasury management.
From a tax and financial compliance perspective, the aforementioned series of changes will impact the methods of value transfer, the boundaries of operational regulation, the entities executing transactions, and the responsibilities for information reporting, thereby promoting the further integration of the crypto industry into the real-world business system. Specifically, the changes in 2026 will be reflected in the following four areas:
- Stablecoins are transforming the way value is transferred;
- Global regulatory changes alter the operating boundaries;
- AI changes the entity initiating trades;
- Tax transparency changes information responsibility.
I. Stablecoins are moving beyond the crypto market, with real-world payments and on-chain settlements accelerating their integration.
1. The size of stablecoins continues to grow, but on-chain activity remains dominant.
According to a 2026 BIS study, the stablecoin market size has exceeded $300 billion, with approximately 98% of stablecoin value denominated in U.S. dollars. Stablecoins have evolved from being quotation and custody tools in crypto trading to becoming mediums for cross-border value transfer; however, the majority of their activity remains tied to crypto-native activities such as trading, arbitrage, and liquidity management.
According to the usage structure estimates released by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City in April 2026, approximately 48.8% of stablecoins are used for exchanges, DeFi, and related financial infrastructure, 29.3% for fund transfers, and only about 0.7% for traditional commodity and service payments. Stablecoins have established significant on-chain liquidity, but currently remain primarily focused on crypto trading, on-chain finance, and fund movement.
2. Growth in real payment volume, with stablecoins serving as the backend settlement tool for traditional payment products.
Artemis’s research on stablecoin payment activity shows that monthly payment volume grew from approximately $1.9 billion in January 2023 to approximately $10.2 billion in August 2025, a roughly 5.4-fold increase. Growth drivers include B2B payments, payroll and freelancer settlements, card spending, merchant payments, and cross-border remittances. B2B stablecoin payments have seen particularly strong growth. Stablecoin adoption does not necessarily manifest as consumers directly managing on-chain wallets; more commonly, settlements are processed in the background via debit cards, payment apps, or enterprise payment platforms.
Source: Artemis, "Stablecoin Payments at Scale," January 2026. The data in the chart represents monthly payment volumes disclosed in the research report.
3. The business chain has been extended, transforming accounting and tax treatment from a point-in-time issue to a full-process issue.
After stablecoins enter real-world operations, business participants are no longer limited to issuers and trading platforms, but also include reserve custodians, minting and redemption service providers, payment processors, card issuers, wallet providers, and fiat on-ramp/off-ramp channels. Different parties have distinct types of income, tax obligations, and data responsibilities.
II. Global regulatory oversight enters a realization phase, with licensed operations shifting toward ongoing supervision and cross-border constraints.
1. A comprehensive regulatory framework is accelerating, but implementation varies across regions.
The FSB’s latest comparative assessment of 28 jurisdictions shows that, as of August 2025, 11 jurisdictions have completed comprehensive crypto-asset regulatory frameworks covering financial stability risks, 8 are in consultation or final drafting stages, 3 have only partial coverage, and 6 remain in early stages. Among jurisdictions with more developed CASP frameworks, regulatory reporting capabilities still lag significantly: of the 19 jurisdictions identified by the FSB as having completed comprehensive CASP frameworks, only 11 have comprehensive regulatory reporting requirements.
Source: FSB, "Thematic Review on FSB Global Regulatory Framework for Crypto-asset Activities," October 2025.
The FSB conducted a consistent assessment of 28 jurisdictions participating in this round of peer review (not covering all jurisdictions). The United States did not submit the review questionnaire due to ongoing federal legislation on stablecoins and digital asset regulation, and thus was not included in the four-phase statistics; however, the report still analyzed the U.S. regulatory developments based on publicly available information.
2. Represented by MiCA, licenses determine the availability of customer services and products.
The EU’s MiCA transition period officially ends on July 1, 2026. ESMA has clearly mandated that entities continuing to provide crypto-asset services to EU customers without MiCA authorization must cease such activities and orderly complete client migrations and business wind-downs. Regulation has shifted from framework development to practical operational constraints: whether a platform can continue acquiring customers, marketing, or offering custody or trading services now depends on its authorization scope and entity structure, not merely on historical registration or foreign licenses.
For multinational crypto companies, the basic unit of regulatory assessment is also changing. Regulation of multinational crypto companies is shifting from group-wide reviews to entity-specific and business-specific oversight, with different services requiring distinct operating entities and corresponding regulatory responsibilities.
3. Anti-money laundering rule coverage has improved; enforcement and cross-border activities are the focus of the next phase.
In its 2026 survey, the FATF found that 91 out of 109 responding jurisdictions had enacted laws to implement the Travel Rule, representing 83%, an increase from 73% in 2025; however, among these 91 jurisdictions with enacted legislation, 55 have not yet issued inspection findings, regulatory guidance, or taken related enforcement actions. The FATF also noted that offshore VASPs, non-custodial wallets, P2P transactions, cross-chain tools, and DeFi arrangements remain regulatory challenges.
The EU’s Transfer of Funds Regulation requires CASPs to transmit payer and payee information during crypto asset transfers; Australia will phase in the Virtual Asset Travel Rule starting in 2026, requiring institutions to identify counterparties and custodial and non-custodial wallets; for offshore VASPs serving local customers, certain jurisdictions have implemented mandatory registration, public warnings, app store removal, and restrictions on access to local financial institutions. The next challenge for businesses will be whether their technical systems can exchange payer and payee information, identify cross-border services directed at local residents, and consistently submit complete, consistent, and verifiable data to regulators.
III. AI Agents emerge as new trading entities, with machine payments reshaping transaction records and liability chains.
Stablecoins provide AI agents with an internet-native payment method.
The x402 protocol, developed by Coinbase, leverages the HTTP 402 status code to enable websites or APIs to request a stablecoin payment directly upon receiving a request. The client can complete the payment and retry the service request without requiring traditional accounts, sessions, or complex authentication processes. This mechanism works for human users as well as AI agents that need to automatically purchase data, computing power, model inference, or other digital services.
Compared to bank cards and bank transfers, Agent payments typically feature small amounts, high frequency, real-time triggering, and per-use invocation. The programmable transfer capability of stablecoins, combined with wallet signing mechanisms, can directly interface with software requests, making them a key technological pathway for machine-to-machine payments.
2. Machine payments have reached a significant scale and exhibit highly automated data characteristics.
Coinbase disclosed in its Q1 2026 earnings that x402 has processed over 100 million cumulative payments, with more than 99% of transactions using USDC. As of July 23, 2026, the x402 official website reported approximately 75.41 million transactions over the past 30 days, with a total transaction value of about $24.24 million, involving around 94,100 buyers and 22,000 sellers. While individual machine payment amounts may be low, the number of transactions and the growth in participating entities are accelerating rapidly.
Source: x402.org real-time page, accessed on July 23, 2026. Metrics are subject to change over time.
3. AI agents require redesigning of transaction authorization, tax allocation, and audit evidence processes.
When an AI Agent autonomously executes transactions on behalf of a company, an on-chain signature can only prove that a specific wallet issued the instruction; it does not automatically verify that the transaction complies with the company’s authorization, procurement policies, and tax handling requirements. The company must at minimum retain records of the Agent’s identity, the delegating party, the scope of permissions, triggering conditions, counterparty details, service specifications, and any human intervention logs.
AI can also be used for transaction classification, journal entry generation, tax event identification, and anomaly detection; however, AI outputs in the finance and tax domain must be supported by verifiable data sources, clearly defined decision rules, complete processing logs, and records of human adjustments. In the future, companies will face the dual challenge of managing the vast volume of machine-generated transactions while demonstrating that AI-generated compliance outcomes are auditable and reviewable.
IV. Tax Transparency Enters Implementation Phase, Platform Reporting Reshapes Cryptocurrency Data Governance
1. CARF is being implemented globally, with 2026 marking the critical period for system development and data collection.
As of June 23, 2026, the OECD Global Forum on Tax Transparency’s published list shows that 76 jurisdictions have formally committed to implementing the CARF, with 46 planning their first exchanges in 2027, 29 in 2028, and the United States in 2029. For jurisdictions planning their first exchanges in 2027, 2026 marks the start of the first information collection cycle: competent authorities must complete domestic legislation and implement reporting rules, while RCASPs must initiate customer due diligence, transaction categorization, data retention, and system modifications for reporting; jurisdictions planning first exchanges in 2028 and 2029 will enter their respective preparatory phases in the preceding years.
Source: OECD Global Forum on Tax Transparency, "Jurisdictions Committed to Implement the CARF," updated June 23, 2026.
2. DAC8 and Form 1099-DA drive platforms to assume direct reporting responsibilities.
The EU’s DAC8 will apply from January 1, 2026, bringing cryptocurrency transactions within the scope of tax administrative cooperation and automatic information exchange. Reporting crypto-asset service providers must identify users and prepare transaction reports. In the United States, digital asset brokers must report transactions via Form 1099-DA: gross proceeds reporting applies to relevant transactions occurring after January 1, 2025, while cost basis reporting for specific covered digital assets will be phased in for transactions occurring after January 1, 2026.
Tax authorities are no longer solely reliant on voluntary self-reporting by individuals, but instead use platform data to identify taxpayers' asset disposals, income, and cross-border holdings. For platforms, tax obligations are no longer limited to their own corporate income tax, but have expanded to include classifying, verifying, and reporting user transactions.
3. There is a significant discrepancy between on-chain data and tax data
Blockchain can provide addresses, timestamps, token amounts, and transaction hashes, but it typically cannot directly answer questions such as who owns an address, whether a transaction changed ownership, whether a transfer constitutes a sale or an internal transfer, how to determine the cost basis, or which tax residency jurisdiction a user belongs to. Therefore, tax reporting requires linking on-chain records with platform account information, self-certification of tax residency, fiat transaction histories, and product business logic.
When CARF, DAC8, Form 1099-DA, the Travel Rule, corporate accounting, and auditing all rely on the same set of user and transaction data, data consistency becomes a new compliance risk. If user identities, asset classifications, amounts, and cost bases conflict across different systems, companies risk not only filing errors but also being unable to explain discrepancies between tax returns, financial records, and regulatory reports.
Crypto compliance is becoming infrastructure.
From a crypto tax and accounting perspective, these four changes collectively point to the same trend: crypto businesses are becoming more deeply integrated into real-world operations and cross-border regulatory frameworks. Stablecoins are expanding payment and settlement use cases, AI agents are increasing transaction automation, and regulatory and tax frameworks require that related transactions be accurately attributed to specific entities and documented in continuous, verifiable records.
Under this context, crypto compliance can no longer rely solely on isolated legal judgments or end-period reporting; it requires the establishment of a data and control system integrated into daily operations. Only by maintaining consistency across customers, accounts, wallets, transactions, accounting treatments, and reporting standards can a company continuously meet requirements for cross-border operations, regulatory reporting, and audit verification. In this regard, crypto compliance will serve as a foundational condition for sustainable business operations.