• Skip to content
  • Skip to primary sidebar

liskow_lewis_white_new

future-focused

  • Team
  • Practices
  • Insights
  • Blogs
    • Energy Law Blog
    • Gulf Coast Business Law Blog
    • Maritime Law Blog
    • Louisiana Industrial Insights Hub
Blogs

IRS Extends and Clarifies Expired Safe Habor for Trusts Staking Digital Assets

10.09.26 | 3 minute read

Featured Image

On October 6, 2026, the IRS issued Revenue Procedure 2026-20, providing updated guidance for certain investment and grantor trusts that stake digital assets. The guidance explains when a qualifying trust may participate in staking without jeopardizing its federal income tax status.

Staking generally involves committing digital assets to help validate transactions on a proof-of-stake blockchain network. In return, participants may receive additional digital assets as staking rewards. When an investment grantor trust takes native tokens, locks them up, receives newly minted block rewards, and auto-compounds or sells those rewards, it is actively managing and varying the trust’s investment portfolio to chase yield. If the IRS determines that the trustee has the power to vary the investment through staking strategies, the entity could lose its status as a grantor trust and be reclassified as an association subject to double-taxation as a corporation or complex partnership reporting.

In the case of personal estate planning non-grantor trusts, staking might accidentally convert an irrevocable trust into a grantor trust if the grantor uses their personal validator node or personal keys, arguably maintaining a right to control or retrieve the property.  Or, if the grantor determines how staking rewards are allocated, distributed, or re-staked among beneficiaries rather than leaving that choice strictly to an independent trustee, the trust would be reclassified as a grantor trust for federal tax purposes. 

The Treasury Department and IRS first addressed such concerns in Revenue Procedure 2025-31, which created a safe harbor allowing qualifying trusts to stake digital assets without losing their tax status, which expired in August of this year. After receiving requests for additional guidance, the IRS issued Revenue Procedure 2026-20 to clarify and replace the earlier guidance. While the updated procedure largely mirrors the prior guidance, it does modify the prior safe-harbor and provides a six-month period for trusts to amend their governing instrument to authorize staking in accordance with the requirements of the safe harbor.  

Under the updated safe harbor, a qualifying trust may stake its digital assets while maintaining its investment trust or grantor trust status if it meets certain requirements. Among other things, the trust’s interests must be traded on a national securities exchange, its staking disclosures must be filed with the SEC in an effective registration statement, and the trust generally may hold only cash and one type of digital asset operating on a permissionless proof-of-stake network.

Staking generally must be conducted through custodians and unrelated staking providers under arm’s-length arrangements. The trust generally must make its digital assets available for staking, but it may keep some assets unstaked for liquidity needs and certain other permitted circumstances.

The Revenue Procedure also addresses staking rewards. The trust may receive additional units of the same digital asset it already holds, but units equal to those rewards, after accounting for trust expenses, generally must be distributed to investors or sold and the proceeds distributed within 60 days after the end of the quarter in which the trust gains control of the rewards.

Revenue Procedure 2026-20 is effective for tax years ending on or after October 6, 2026. Existing trusts enjoy a six-month transition period to meet the updated safe harbor requirements.

Overall, the new guidance provides greater certainty for qualifying trusts that want to participate in digital asset staking while preserving their status as a qualified investment trust or as a grantor trust if the safe harbor requirements are satisfied. Contact Liskow’s Transactional and Tax attorneys Leon Rittenberg III, Caroline Lafourcade, Abby Strohmeyer, and visit our Tax Practice page for additional information.

Primary Sidebar

Related Practices

  • Tax

Related Team

  • Media item displaying: Leon H. Rittenberg III

    Leon H. Rittenberg III

    Shareholder

    New Orleans
    504.299.6135504.299.6135
  • Media item displaying: Caroline Lafourcade

    Caroline Lafourcade

    Shareholder

    New Orleans
    504.556.4035504.556.4035
  • Media item displaying: Abigail E. “Abby” Strohmeyer

    Abigail E. “Abby” Strohmeyer

    Associate

    New Orleans
    504-556-4027504-556-4027
Liskow & Lewis, APLC
Arrow Icon

future-focused

  • Baton Rouge
  • Houston
  • Lafayette
  • New Orleans
  • New York City
  • New Bedford
  • © 2026 Liskow & Lewis, APLC
  • Sitemap
  • Disclaimer
  • Employee Login
Site by
We use cookies on our website to give you the most relevant experience by remembering your preferences and repeat visits. By clicking “Accept All”, you consent to the use of ALL the cookies. However, you may visit "Cookie Settings" to provide a controlled consent.
Cookie SettingsAccept All
Manage consent

Privacy Overview

This website uses cookies to improve your experience while you navigate through the website. Out of these, the cookies that are categorized as necessary are stored on your browser as they are essential for the working of basic functionalities of the website. We also use third-party cookies that help us analyze and understand how you use this website. These cookies will be stored in your browser only with your consent. You also have the option to opt-out of these cookies. But opting out of some of these cookies may affect your browsing experience.
Necessary
Always Enabled
Necessary cookies are absolutely essential for the website to function properly. These cookies ensure basic functionalities and security features of the website, anonymously.
CookieDurationDescription
cookielawinfo-checkbox-analytics11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Analytics".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-functional11 monthsThe cookie is set by GDPR cookie consent to record the user consent for the cookies in the category "Functional".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-necessary11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookies is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Necessary".
cookielawinfo-checkbox-others11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Other.
cookielawinfo-checkbox-performance11 monthsThis cookie is set by GDPR Cookie Consent plugin. The cookie is used to store the user consent for the cookies in the category "Performance".
viewed_cookie_policy11 monthsThe cookie is set by the GDPR Cookie Consent plugin and is used to store whether or not user has consented to the use of cookies. It does not store any personal data.
Functional
Functional cookies help to perform certain functionalities like sharing the content of the website on social media platforms, collect feedbacks, and other third-party features.
Performance
Performance cookies are used to understand and analyze the key performance indexes of the website which helps in delivering a better user experience for the visitors.
Analytics
Analytical cookies are used to understand how visitors interact with the website. These cookies help provide information on metrics the number of visitors, bounce rate, traffic source, etc.
Advertisement
Advertisement cookies are used to provide visitors with relevant ads and marketing campaigns. These cookies track visitors across websites and collect information to provide customized ads.
Others
Other uncategorized cookies are those that are being analyzed and have not been classified into a category as yet.
SAVE & ACCEPT
  • Team
  • Practices
  • Insights
  • Blogs
  • Offices
  • Pro Bono
  • About Us
  • Careers
  • DEI
  • The Energy Law Blog
  • Gulf Coast Business Law Blog
  • The Maritime Law Blog