📢 #Gate广场征文活动第二期# 正式啓動!
分享你對 $ERA 項目的獨特觀點,推廣ERA上線活動, 700 $ERA 等你來贏!
💰 獎勵:
一等獎(1名): 100枚 $ERA
二等獎(5名): 每人 60 枚 $ERA
三等獎(10名): 每人 30 枚 $ERA
👉 參與方式:
1.在 Gate廣場發布你對 ERA 項目的獨到見解貼文
2.在貼文中添加標籤: #Gate广场征文活动第二期# ,貼文字數不低於300字
3.將你的文章或觀點同步到X,加上標籤:Gate Square 和 ERA
4.徵文內容涵蓋但不限於以下創作方向:
ERA 項目亮點:作爲區塊鏈基礎設施公司,ERA 擁有哪些核心優勢?
ERA 代幣經濟模型:如何保障代幣的長期價值及生態可持續發展?
參與並推廣 Gate x Caldera (ERA) 生態周活動。點擊查看活動詳情:https://www.gate.com/announcements/article/46169。
歡迎圍繞上述主題,或從其他獨特視角提出您的見解與建議。
⚠️ 活動要求:
原創內容,至少 300 字, 重復或抄襲內容將被淘汰。
不得使用 #Gate广场征文活动第二期# 和 #ERA# 以外的任何標籤。
每篇文章必須獲得 至少3個互動,否則無法獲得獎勵
鼓勵圖文並茂、深度分析,觀點獨到。
⏰ 活動時間:2025年7月20日 17
Programmable regulation is the missing key to DeFi’s legal future
Opinion by: Raks Sondhi, chief operating officer of Freedx
Governing composable, borderless and programmable ecosystems with rules made for simple, static financial systems presents a fundamental challenge.
In the past year alone, decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms held over $60 billion worth of crypto assets locked in their protocols. Yet most jurisdictions still lack a clear definition of a decentralized autonomous organization (DAO). This confusion is slowing innovation and undermining the credibility of regulatory institutions.
Lawmakers still assume there is a centralized actor to license, audit or subpoena. However, DAOs are intentionally decentralized, smart contracts operate autonomously and onchain assets can move without permission.
Although US regulators have started targeting protocols under existing securities laws, courts struggle to determine if autonomous software can be held liable. Legacy regulatory tools were not designed to oversee systems that evolve in real-time. These challenges have led regulators worldwide to attempt new crypto regulation approaches
On a global scale, the Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) is attempting to provide a unified framework for regulation in the EU, going as far as restricting the use of tokens like Tether’s USDt (USDT) that do not comply with its standards. In the US, the SEC and Commodity Futures Trading Commission have brought legal action against DAO participants and DeFi protocols. Some US states, like Wyoming, have even passed laws to give DAOs a kind of corporate status
Yet these efforts seem deeply limited and rely heavily on retroactive enforcement, which results in a chilling effect where builders hesitate to move forward, capital sits idle, and regulations are in a cat-and-mouse chase that benefits no one or doesn’t solve the actual problem. They are slowly patching holes in a highly dynamic and evolving space.
Governing software through embedded compliance
How do we stop chasing? The answer lies in some sort of policy-as-code solution. Instead of trying to fit decentralized technologies into traditional legal systems, we need a new policy infrastructure that is as composable and programmable as the technologies it needs to oversee. We must build compliance layers directly into the code and embed regulatory logic inside the DeFi protocols’ infrastructure.
Related: FCA-registered BCP launches British pound stablecoin
Just as financial instruments onchain are now composed of interoperable modules, a lending protocol should be able to plug in specific compliance modules to fit their jurisdictional needs. A DAO treasury should be able to self-report tax events as they occur. A stablecoin protocol should be able to enforce sanctions lists through zero-knowledge proofs or onchain attestations, and so on
Some projects are already developing components for privacy-preserving and onchain compliance. Other projects are building permissioned architectures to align with regulatory demands. Even centralized exchanges are exploring onchain compliance rails that could apply to decentralized protocols
Legal clarity is the key to DeFi’s full potential
From a market standpoint, embedded compliance has the potential to de-risk DeFi, attracting new investors and users alike. Legal clarity from embedding policy directly into the infrastructure would reduce the enforcement gap and enhance consumer protections.
For developers, it unlocks the composability of regulatory regimes, allowing them to select from jurisdictional templates like they do UI components, adapting their codebase in real time to meet evolving policy. No more guessing whether your DAO token is a security, no more wondering if a protocol is subject to reporting requirements, and less reliance on costly legal interpretation
Although policy-as-code sounds very advantageous, the programmable policy has its own risks. As with any other connected environment, code can be exploited. We must wonder what would happen when a compliance module is compromised, malfunctions or becomes outdated. Governance, security and upgradability remain essential, but democratic oversight is a pillar of blockchain technology. Embedding regulation in code must not mean removing it from public accountability, as that will decrease trust and transparency, further pushing the Web3 space from mainstream adoption
We are at a crossroads, either reimagining the intersection between DeFi and law or allowing the gap between regulation and permissionless innovation to widen. One path leads to inclusive, efficient, transparent finance governed by rules everyone can see and understand
The other path leads to gray markets, enforcement chaos and capital flight.
Policy must modularly evolve and adapt to new structures, logic and ecosystems. The key to unlocking that is to govern software with software.
Opinion by: Raks Sondhi, chief operating officer of Freedx.
This article is for general information purposes and is not intended to be and should not be taken as legal or investment advice. The views, thoughts, and opinions expressed here are the author’s alone and do not necessarily reflect or represent the views and opinions of Cointelegraph.