The US Government Accountability Office is, once again, telling the FDIC it needs to get its act together on crypto oversight. In a letter dated June 8, 2026, the GAO reminded the federal deposit insurer that a recommendation it made back in July 2023 for formal interagency coordination on blockchain-related risks still hasn’t been fully implemented.
The coordination gap nobody wants to close
The original recommendation came from a July 2023 GAO report, cataloged as GAO-23-105346. Its core finding was straightforward: federal regulators lack an “ongoing coordination mechanism for addressing blockchain risks.” The agencies named in that report read like a who’s-who of US financial regulation: the FDIC, the Federal Reserve, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency, the SEC, the CFTC, the National Credit Union Administration, and the Consumer Financial Protection Bureau.
As of the GAO’s latest communication, the recommendation remains “open and partially addressed.” The GAO clearly wants a formal joint mechanism, not a patchwork of individual agency actions that might or might not align.
There has been some movement. In July 2025, the FDIC, Federal Reserve, and OCC issued a joint statement on crypto-asset risk management. That’s three out of seven agencies.
The FDIC’s solo moves on crypto
While the interagency coordination question lingers, the FDIC hasn’t been sitting idle on its own turf. On March 28, 2025, the agency issued FIL-7-2025, a directive that effectively rescinded previous requirements for banks to notify the FDIC before engaging in crypto-asset activities.
The new approach lets banks engage in permissible crypto-asset activities without prior approval, as long as they follow appropriate risk management guidelines.
Blockchain-related financial products have grown substantially since the GAO’s original 2023 finding. More banks are exploring tokenized deposits, digital asset custody, and blockchain-based settlement systems. By dropping the notification requirement, the FDIC gave institutions a clearer runway to participate in these markets without bureaucratic drag.
Why this matters for the crypto market
Without a structured coordination framework, each regulator operates from its own vantage point. The FDIC sees deposit risk. The SEC sees securities risk. The CFTC sees commodity risk. Without coordinated oversight, the rules of the road can vary depending on which regulator happens to be looking. A bank might be in full compliance with FDIC expectations while running afoul of SEC interpretations, or vice versa.
The 2023 GAO report identified this exact problem. Blockchain products often don’t fit neatly into one regulator’s jurisdiction. A stablecoin, for instance, might simultaneously touch banking regulation, securities law, and consumer protection rules.
The GAO doesn’t have enforcement power. It can recommend and it can shame, but it can’t force the FDIC or any other agency to act. What it can do is create a paper trail that makes inaction increasingly difficult to justify. Three years of an open recommendation is a long time, and each subsequent letter raises the political cost of ignoring it.