PGPZ registers to lobby Washington for Zcash, effective Oct. 1
The filing names Divij Pandya as sole lobbyist and targets the CLARITY Act and two digital-asset tax proposals.
Pretty Good Policy for Zcash filed a Washington lobbying registration effective Oct. 1, naming executive director Divij Pandya as its sole lobbyist. The group disclosed a $750,000 first-year grant and listed the CLARITY Act plus two digital-asset tax proposals as priority issues.
PGPZ Registers a Washington Lobbyist for Zcash, Effective Oct. 1
Pretty Good Policy for Zcash (PGPZ) filed a lobbying registration effective Oct. 1, naming executive director Divij Pandya as its sole lobbyist. That matters because it moves Zcash’s policy posture from informal outreach into the regulated, disclosed lane that Washington actually runs on.
The registration lists the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act and “two digital asset tax proposals” among PGPZ’s current and anticipated lobbying issues. The filing excerpt does not specify the identities of the two tax proposals, and it does not include a spend figure or a detailed workplan.
PGPZ launched in June 2026 and grew out of Pretty Good Policy for Crypto, an initiative launched in 2022 by Electric Coin Co. That earlier effort hosted Washington policy roundtables and organized a congressional briefing on encryption technologies in 2023, giving PGPZ a pre-existing policy footprint to build on.
PGPZ founder Paul Brigner, who is also described as chief policy and regulatory officer of ZODL, framed the mission as institutionalizing Zcash’s presence in DC. The goal is to “make sure Zcash has serious, organized, and credible policy engagement in Washington,” Brigner said.
CLARITY Act and Crypto Tax Proposals Move to the Top of Zcash’s Policy Agenda
PGPZ’s issue list is a tell. It is not a single-issue defense of privacy tech. It is a broader attempt to shape market-structure and tax outcomes that can change how privacy-preserving assets are treated by intermediaries and end users.
The CLARITY Act is a proposed US bill aimed at defining regulatory rules and oversight for digital-asset markets. For traders, that is a narrative driver because it can reprice compliance assumptions across venues, not just across tokens. Privacy-preserving digital cash sits in the part of the market where policy language often turns into de-risking decisions by counterparties.
The tax lane is the other half of the setup. PGPZ’s filing flags “two digital asset tax proposals,” but the excerpt does not name them. That ambiguity is not trivial. Tax proposals can range from reporting and withholding mechanics to treatment of transactions, and each version hits liquidity and user behavior differently.
Funding is disclosed, even if spend is not. Zcash Community Grants approved a $750,000 grant in August to fund PGPZ’s first year of work, giving the effort a defined runway through at least one legislative cycle.
Why This Matters for Privacy-Coin Risk: Organization, Funding, and Staying Power
The threshold that matters is whether this turns into repeatable, disclosed engagement that survives beyond the first grant year, not a one-off headline. A lobbying registration effective Oct. 1 with a named in-house lobbyist is a real escalation in process terms, but the market impact depends on follow-through.
The real test is specificity. If future filings add spend levels, targeted committees, and the identities of the “two digital asset tax proposals,” traders get cleaner inputs for handicapping US policy risk around privacy-preserving assets. If CLARITY Act milestones start moving through committee action, markup, or floor scheduling while PGPZ is active in that lane, the setup starts to look structural rather than narrative-driven.
