BTC $74,428 
EQQQQ $655.75 Last updated 8 Nov 2026, 12:03 UTC
ETH $2,117 
MGLOEURO $111,813 
USDT $0.9990 
BNB $684.42 
USDC $0.9995 
XRP $1.09 
SOL $86.33 
TRX $0.3177 Regulation · Explained
FinCEN and Fed withdraw 2020 plan to lower travel rule threshold and name crypto
The agencies scrapped a six-year-old proposal that would have cut the cross-border reporting line to $250 and written convertible virtual currency into the
Key takeaways
- Proposal, not a rule. The action removes a pending notice of proposed rulemaking; it does not change the travel rule or recordkeeping obligations that already apply.
- Threshold unchanged. The $3,000 line for transfers that begin or end outside the United States remains in place.
- Fresh comment needed. Any future attempt to lower the cross-border threshold or add crypto to the definitions would have to start a new public comment round.
What happened
FinCEN and the Federal Reserve have withdrawn a 2020 notice of proposed rulemaking that would have broadened US recordkeeping and travel rule requirements and named convertible virtual currency in the rules themselves. FinCEN announced the decision on Nov. 6, and the joint notice was published in the Federal Register on Nov. 9. The two agencies said they will not take further action on the proposal.
As written, the October 2020 plan would have reduced the threshold for transfers that begin or end outside the United States from $3,000 to $250. It would also have stated that money, as the term appears in both the Recordkeeping Rule and the Travel Rule, covers convertible virtual currency and any digital asset that is legal tender, applying that reading to transfers within the US as well as across borders. The Travel Rule obliges institutions to pass sender and recipient details along to the next institution handling a transfer; the Recordkeeping Rule obliges them to collect and keep that information.
The existing $3,000 threshold remains in force, and the withdrawal does not loosen any current travel rule duty. What has been removed is a pending proposal, so banks and crypto firms continue to operate under the same day-to-day obligations as before.
Why it matters
The notice gives two reasons for the reversal. The first is age: the plan dates from 2020, and the agencies want new feedback before attempting anything comparable. The withdrawal is intended, in their words, to give the public certainty that no final rule will be issued without another opportunity to comment. The second is that the market and legal landscape has shifted. The notice said convertible virtual currency markets have continued to mature and new legal frameworks are emerging, citing the GENIUS Act, the federal stablecoin law enacted in July 2025, and said any future crypto-related changes to the two rules should account for such developments.
The move came on the same day FinCEN imposed a targeted financial restriction on the exchange MEXC Global. As NewsBTC noted, the two decisions are not in conflict: an agency can abandon a broad proposed expansion while using existing authorities against specific firms it considers risky.
What the data shows
The numbers behind the decision: a $3,000 threshold that stays, against a proposed $250 line for transfers with a foreign start or end point. The original proposal was issued in October 2020 and sat open for roughly six years. FinCEN announced the withdrawal on Nov. 6, 2026, with the joint notice in the Federal Register on Nov. 9. Close to 3,000 comments were filed, predominantly form letters. The notice was signed by FinCEN Deputy Director Jimmy L. Kirby and Benjamin McDonough, secretary of the Federal Reserve's Board of Governors; FinCEN's release carried no comment from any official.
Background
The proposal grew out of FinCEN's May 2019 guidance, which the notice said had already indicated that the two rules may cover crypto transfers handled by nonbank firms. When the 2020 plan was open for comment, the crypto language drew a mixed response. Crypto service providers and their trade groups generally opposed it, while some banks, money services businesses and their trade associations supported it. The agencies received nearly 3,000 comments, most of them form letters, and commenters broadly opposed the lower threshold. Some argued that inflation since 1995 justified raising the line rather than cutting it, while others warned that a $250 trigger would place a heavy burden on financial institutions, particularly smaller ones, hinder consumers sending remittances abroad, or increase firms' liability for the personal data they hold.
What to watch
The open question is whether the agencies return with a replacement proposal and on what timetable, or instead issue guidance on the transfers affected. Any new attempt to lower the cross-border threshold or to write crypto into the definitions would begin with another comment period, and the scope of such a plan cannot be inferred from the withdrawal alone. Cross-border businesses may also want to track how US requirements diverge from those in the jurisdictions where their counterparties operate.
Questions readers ask
Does the withdrawal end the travel rule for crypto?
No. It cancels a proposal that would have amended the rules. Existing obligations under the Recordkeeping Rule and the Travel Rule, including the $3,000 threshold, are unchanged.
What would the 2020 proposal have done?
It would have lowered the threshold to $250 for transfers starting or ending outside the United States and stated that convertible virtual currency and legal-tender digital assets fall within the definition of money in both rules.
Why did the agencies pull it?
They said the plan was more than five years old and needed fresh public input, and that crypto markets have matured alongside new legal frameworks such as the GENIUS Act.
