TL;DR

• Section 10903 would require Treasury and DOJ to create a digital-asset training program within 180 days of the CLARITY Act becoming law.
• The program would train public-sector personnel, including investigators, prosecutors, analysts, regulators and state attorneys general.
• Training would cover crypto crime, AML, sanctions, fraud, cybersecurity, consumer protection and national-security risks.
• It would also focus on agency roles, reporting pathways and information sharing, not just blockchain tracing.
• The goal is to help agencies turn technical crypto leads into coordinated, defensible investigative action.

The updated CLARITY Act would create a digital-asset law-enforcement and national-security training program for personnel across federal, state, local, Tribal, and territorial governments.

Section 10903 is easy to reduce to a simple idea: more cryptocurrency training for investigators. The proposed program is much broader.

Its curriculum would cover the Act’s illicit-finance and enforcement provisions, the roles of major federal agencies, investigative and reporting tools, referrals, information sharing, customer protection, and coordination across levels of government.

That scope reflects an operational reality. Tracing a transaction is only one part of a digital-asset investigation. Personnel also need to know what authority applies, which organization should act, how intelligence can be shared, where a matter should be referred, and how technical findings fit into a defensible investigation.

Short answer: Section 10903 of the updated CLARITY Act would direct the Treasury Secretary and Attorney General to establish a digital-asset law-enforcement and national-security training program within 180 days of enactment. The program would serve a broad government audience and cover the Act’s illicit-finance rules, agency roles, investigative and information-sharing tools, customer protection, interagency coordination, and national-security risks.

What is Section 10903 of the CLARITY Act?

Section 10903 appears in Title IX of the updated CLARITY Act, which is devoted to law-enforcement tools.

If enacted in its current form, the section would require the Secretary of the Treasury and the Attorney General to jointly establish and administer the training program. The deadline would be 180 days after enactment.

The program’s formal title is the “digital asset law enforcement and national security training program.”

The law-enforcement fact sheet released with the updated text describes Section 10903 as educating law enforcement, prosecutors, and regulators on conducting digital-asset investigations, disrupting illicit finance, and identifying national-security threats. The operative text provides a more detailed account of the intended participants and curriculum.

Who would receive training under Section 10903?

The proposed audience is extensive.

Section 10903 would cover:

• Federal law-enforcement officers, investigators, prosecutors, analysts, and national-security personnel
• State, local, Tribal, and territorial law-enforcement officers, investigators, prosecutors, and analysts
• Personnel from Treasury and the Department of Justice
• Personnel from the Securities and Exchange Commission and Commodity Futures Trading Commission
• State financial regulators
• State attorneys general with responsibility for digital assets, money transmission, securities, commodities, banking, consumer protection, or illicit finance
• Other government personnel selected by Treasury and the Attorney General

This list shows that the proposal is not limited to sworn investigators.

Prosecutors need to understand how blockchain evidence supports a case. Analysts need to connect addresses, transactions, entities, victims, and off-chain records. Regulators need to understand the tools and obligations available under the proposed framework. State attorneys general may encounter digital assets through consumer fraud, securities, money transmission, banking, or illicit-finance matters.

Bringing these roles into a common program could help reduce a familiar problem: one organization may recognize suspicious activity but not know which partner has the authority, information, or capability needed for the next step.

What would the CLARITY Act training program cover?

Section 10903 identifies four broad areas.

1. The Act’s illicit-finance, enforcement, and protection provisions

The program would provide education and technical assistance concerning provisions related to:

• Illicit finance
• Sanctions compliance
• Anti-money-laundering obligations
• Countering the financing of terrorism
• Fraud
• Market manipulation
• Cybersecurity
• Customer protection
• National security

This is a wider scope than a course focused exclusively on cryptocurrency mechanics.

Personnel may need to understand how the same transaction connects to several legal and operational questions. An apparent fraud payment could also involve money laundering, sanctions exposure, a compromised account, or a larger organized network. The correct response may depend on facts held by a bank, exchange, local agency, federal agency, or regulator.

Training must therefore connect the technology to the purpose of the investigation.

2. The roles of Treasury, DOJ, the SEC, and the CFTC

The program would explain the respective roles of the Department of the Treasury, Department of Justice, SEC, and CFTC under the legislation.

This is not administrative trivia.

Digital-asset matters can involve criminal enforcement, financial intelligence, sanctions, commodities, securities, consumer protection, and state-law responsibilities. Personnel who identify relevant activity need to understand which authorities may apply and where information should go.

Clearer role awareness can help investigators avoid dead ends, make better referrals, and bring the right organization into a matter earlier.

It can also help financial institutions. Banks, fintechs, exchanges, and other regulated organizations regularly receive inquiries or identify activity that may concern more than one government body. Better-trained public-sector counterparts can make those interactions more focused and useful.

3. Investigative, supervisory, reporting, referral, and information-sharing tools

Section 10903 would cover the use of tools available under the Act, its amendments, and other applicable federal law.

The text specifically names:

• Investigative tools
• Supervisory tools
• Reporting tools
• Referral tools
• Information-sharing tools
• Customer-protection tools

This part of the curriculum may be the provision’s most practical feature.

An investigator can follow funds correctly and still struggle to move a case forward. The address may connect to an account at a financial institution. Another agency may be investigating related activity. A regulator may hold relevant supervisory information. A victim report may need to be linked to a broader pattern. A time-sensitive request may need to reach a verified contact.

Technical analysis creates a lead. Operational knowledge determines what happens to it.

Section 10903 therefore treats tool use as a workflow, not a collection of isolated skills. Personnel would need to understand how an observation becomes a report, referral, request, information-sharing event, investigative step, or customer-protection response.

4. Coordination across agencies and levels of government

The proposed program would address coordination among federal, state, local, Tribal, and territorial law-enforcement agencies and federal financial regulators.

The specified subjects include digital-asset investigations, enforcement matters, and national-security risks.

This requirement connects Section 10903 to the wider information-sharing architecture of the updated CLARITY Act.

Section 10203 would create a public-private information-sharing pilot. Section 10204 would establish a policy working group. Section 10904 would create a Digital Asset Cyber Innovation Center. Section 10905 would establish a cryptocurrency-scams task force.

Training personnel to understand roles, tools, referrals, and coordination paths helps make those proposed structures usable.

A secure channel does not resolve fragmentation by itself. Participants must know what information is relevant, what can be shared, who should receive it, and what action the information can support.

Why crypto training cannot stop at blockchain tracing

Blockchain tracing is an important investigative capability. It can help personnel follow transactions, identify services, examine flow patterns, and generate leads.

It does not answer every question an investigation presents.

On-chain analysis may not reveal:

• Who controls an address
• Whether a transaction is tied to a reported victim
• Whether another agency has an active investigation
• Which institution holds identifying or account information
• Whether the same infrastructure appears in cases across several jurisdictions
• Which legal process or referral path is appropriate
• Whether an intelligence signal is current, verified, or permitted for a particular use

Those answers often depend on off-chain records and human coordination.

Effective digital-asset training should help personnel move between four connected layers:

1. Technical understanding: Read transactions, addresses, and fund flows accurately.
2. Investigative context: Connect blockchain activity to victims, entities, cases, and off-chain evidence.
3. Authority and process: Identify the relevant agency, legal tool, reporting obligation, and referral path.
4. Coordination: Determine whether another authorized organization has related intelligence and communicate securely enough to support action.

Section 10903 reaches across all four layers. That is what makes it more consequential than a narrow technical-training mandate.

Where Deconflict training fits

Deconflict offers free crypto-investigation training for law enforcement, prosecutors, compliance officers, financial institutions, and other professionals supporting crypto-related investigations.

The training uses case-based instruction focused on wallet tracing, transaction analysis, investigative workflows, professional blockchain-investigation tools, and direct questions tied to investigative scenarios.

That makes it a practical resource for organizations building capability now.

Deconflict’s training is not the federal program proposed in Section 10903, and the legislation does not name or endorse Deconflict. Nor should a private training session be described as satisfying a future federal program whose final curriculum has not been established.

The natural connection is narrower and more credible:

Section 10903 recognizes a broad need for digital-asset investigative capability. Deconflict gives law enforcement and financial-institution professionals access to practical training today while also providing the Verified Intelligence and coordination environment through which investigative skills can support real cases.

Training teaches personnel how to identify and interpret relevant activity. Deconfliction helps them determine whether that activity connects to work elsewhere. Secure coordination helps the right organizations act on the connection.

These are different capabilities, but they reinforce one another.

Conclusion

Section 10903 makes a useful distinction: digital-asset readiness is not achieved by purchasing an analytics tool or teaching a small group how to trace a wallet.

Investigators, analysts, prosecutors, regulators, and national-security personnel need a shared understanding of the technology, applicable authorities, agency roles, referrals, information-sharing tools, and coordination procedures.

That is the larger capability the updated CLARITY Act would attempt to build.

Organizations do not need to wait for the legislative process to improve their readiness. Deconflict provides free, case-based crypto-investigation training for law enforcement, prosecutors, compliance officers, financial institutions, and professionals supporting digital-asset investigations.

Register for free training at deconflict.com/training.

FAQs

What is Section 10903 of the CLARITY Act?
It is a proposed provision requiring Treasury and DOJ to establish a digital-asset law-enforcement and national-security training program.

Who would receive training under Section 10903?
Federal, state, local, Tribal and territorial investigators, prosecutors, analysts, regulators, state attorneys general and other government personnel selected by Treasury and DOJ.

What would the training cover?
It would cover illicit finance, sanctions, AML, counter-terrorist financing, fraud, market manipulation, cybersecurity, customer protection, national security, agency roles and information-sharing tools.

Why is blockchain tracing alone not enough?
Tracing can generate a lead, but it may not reveal who controls an address, whether another agency has an active case or what legal or referral path should come next.

Does Section 10903 create a Deconflict training program?
No. The proposed legislation does not name or endorse Deconflict. Deconflict’s free, case-based training is a separate resource that can help organizations build practical digital-asset investigation skills now.