As regulatory landscapes shift and technological ambitions soar, the world’s biggest economies are making bold moves to shape the future of digital infrastructure. On January 12, 2026, two major developments captured global attention: PwC’s decisive leap into the crypto sector in the United States, and India’s controversial proposal to force smartphone manufacturers to share their software source code with the government. Each event signals a profound transformation in the relationship between technology, regulation, and business, with significant consequences for industry giants and everyday users alike.
According to Financial Times, PwC, one of the world’s Big Four accounting firms, is accelerating its crypto strategy after years of cautious observation. The catalyst? A dramatic thaw in the U.S. regulatory environment, spearheaded by policy shifts under President Donald Trump. In July 2025, President Trump signed the GENIUS Act, a landmark law establishing a federal regulatory framework for stablecoin payments. The act not only legitimized stablecoins as a payment instrument but also paved the way for banks to issue their own tokens, a move that many see as a bridge between traditional finance and the burgeoning world of digital assets.
Paul Griggs, Senior Partner at PwC U.S., explained the significance of this change: “GENIUS Act and the regulations around stablecoins, in my view, will give businesses more confidence when deciding to dive deeper into this product and asset class.” Griggs emphasized that the tokenization of assets is only set to expand, adding, “PwC cannot stand outside that ecosystem.”
Alongside legislative changes, regulatory agencies are also evolving. The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC), under Chairman Paul Atkins, is reportedly working to develop clearer, more predictable rules for the crypto market. As Reuters noted, the SEC is currently reviewing new approaches to token issuance, custody, and trading—efforts aimed at reducing uncertainty and supporting legitimate innovation.
This regulatory clarity has emboldened PwC to move beyond its traditionally high barriers to entry for crypto clients. Historically, Big Four firms—especially in the U.S.—have been reluctant to engage with crypto businesses, wary of regulatory skepticism and reputational risks following high-profile industry failures. Yet, as the legal environment softens, demand is growing for auditors and consultants who can verify reserves, assess governance structures, and ensure transparency for tokenized assets.
PwC’s internal transformation is a story in itself. The firm has begun accepting more crypto audit contracts, including a recent appointment by Mara Holdings, a listed bitcoin mining company, for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2025. According to company filings, this marks a significant expansion of PwC’s crypto portfolio. Griggs told Financial Times that the company is “strengthening resources both internally and externally,” including hiring senior talent such as Cheryl Lesnik. “We would never rush into a business area unless we were prepared to execute,” he said. “Over the past 10–12 months, as PwC has seen more opportunities in digital assets, we’ve reinforced our capabilities significantly.”
PwC is not alone in this race. Deloitte has served as auditor for Coinbase, a leading crypto exchange, since 2020, while KPMG is aggressively marketing its compliance and risk management services for digital assets. The Big Four are clearly positioning themselves for a future where regulated tokenization and stablecoins bring traditional finance ever closer to crypto infrastructure.
But as the U.S. opens doors to new forms of financial innovation, halfway across the globe, India is tightening its regulatory grip on consumer technology. In a sweeping move reported by Reuters, the Indian government has proposed a vast technology security reform package designed to combat rising online fraud and data breaches in the world’s second-largest smartphone market, home to nearly 750 million devices.
The proposal, drafted as the Indian Telecom Security Assurance Requirements, includes no fewer than 83 technical mandates. Chief among them is a demand that smartphone manufacturers share their software source code with government authorities for review and testing in designated Indian labs. The government’s stated aim is to increase user data protection and stem the tide of cybercrime, but the plan has sparked fierce, if discreet, resistance from global tech giants like Apple, Samsung, Google, and Xiaomi.
Other requirements are equally far-reaching. Manufacturers would be compelled to let users uninstall pre-installed apps, block applications from accessing cameras and microphones in the background, and ensure devices perform regular automatic malware scans. Additionally, smartphones would have to store system logs for a minimum of 12 months, and any major software update or security patch would need to be pre-notified to authorities, giving the government time to check for compliance.
India’s IT Secretary, S. Krishnan, has attempted to reassure the industry, saying the government is “ready to listen with an open mind” and that it’s “too early to draw conclusions.” Yet, industry groups remain unconvinced. The Manufacturers’ Association for Information Technology (MAIT), representing leading tech firms, has pushed back hard. In a formal response to the government, MAIT argued that “evaluating vulnerabilities through source code review and analysis is not feasible,” citing direct risks to security, privacy, and trade secrets. The group stressed that no major country in the EU, North America, Australia, or Africa imposes similar requirements, and called for the provision to be scrapped.
MAIT also warned that mandatory malware scanning could significantly reduce battery life, degrading the user experience. The requirement to store detailed system logs for a year could overwhelm device storage, impacting performance. Perhaps most worrying for manufacturers is the prospect of having to seek government approval before releasing critical security updates—a process that could delay vital patches and expose users to new threats.
Apple’s history in this arena is telling. The company has previously refused similar requests from the Chinese government between 2014 and 2016, and even U.S. law enforcement has never succeeded in forcing Apple to hand over its source code. For many in the industry, India’s proposal represents a “red line” that threatens both intellectual property and the practical viability of their products in a key growth market.
Yet, India has a track record of regulatory assertiveness. Just last month, the government was forced to withdraw a rule mandating installation of a state-run cybersecurity app after widespread surveillance concerns. However, in other cases—such as strict checks on security cameras over fears of Chinese espionage—New Delhi has pressed ahead despite industry lobbying.
With Xiaomi, Samsung, and Apple commanding 19%, 15%, and 5% of the Indian smartphone market respectively, manufacturers face a delicate balancing act: defending global interests while maintaining access to one of the world’s most lucrative consumer bases. The next round of talks between the Indian government and technology leaders, scheduled for this week, could be decisive in determining whether these contentious proposals are softened or become law.
As the worlds of finance and technology converge and collide, the choices made by regulators and industry leaders in the coming months will shape not only business strategies, but also the daily lives of millions. Whether it’s the promise of faster, safer payments or the fear of overreaching surveillance, the stakes have rarely been higher.
