Evidence since 2021 clearly shows non‑US jurisdictions have taken the lead in formal legal structures and regulatory clarity for DAOs and related crypto entities, but the United States has remained a dominant source of capital and development talent for the broader crypto/DAO ecosystem. Because there is no agreed quantitative benchmark for “being left behind” in DAOs, and different dimensions point in opposite directions, the prediction cannot be judged definitively.

Evidence that ex‑US jurisdictions lead in DAO structures/adoption

• Switzerland / Crypto Valley as a DAO and foundation hub. Zug’s “Crypto Valley” has become one of the world’s largest crypto hubs, hosting over 1,200 blockchain/crypto companies by 2024, including the foundations of major protocols such as Ethereum, Cardano, Solana and Polkadot, which are all legally based there rather than in the U.S.(en.wikipedia.org) Zug is frequently described as a global capital for DAOs and Web3 foundations.
• DAO‑friendly offshore jurisdictions. Legal‑structuring guides and law‑firm analyses note that many DAOs choose Swiss foundations, Cayman foundation companies, Liechtenstein foundations, and other offshore entities as their primary wrappers, explicitly because these jurisdictions are more accommodating for decentralized governance.(encrypthos.com) These jurisdictions are repeatedly described as among the most common or well‑used homes for DAOs.
• Marshall Islands DAO Act and large DAO count. The Republic of the Marshall Islands passed a dedicated Decentralized Autonomous Organizations Act of 2022, legally recognizing DAOs as LLCs, explicitly designed to attract DAOs globally.(globenewswire.com) The government’s partner MIDAO reports that by late 2024 it had incorporated or was incorporating over 200 DAO LLCs under this framework and actively markets the country as a leading jurisdiction for Web3 and DAO incorporation.(docs.midao.org)
• EU and other regions providing earlier comprehensive crypto regulation. The EU’s MiCA regulation, adopted in 2023 and fully applicable from December 2024, is widely characterized as the first comprehensive legal framework for crypto‑assets, providing clearer conditions for tokens and service providers that DAOs rely on.(en.wikipedia.org) In Asia and the Middle East, jurisdictions like Singapore, Hong Kong and the UAE have built explicit digital‑asset licensing regimes and branded themselves as crypto and Web3 hubs, attracting exchanges and infrastructure providers that DAOs depend on.(cnbc.com)
• Analyses explicitly stating U.S. federal treatment is late and aggressive compared to peers. A 2024 review of the DAO legal landscape notes that U.S. federal regulation for crypto and DAOs is still pending, with only a few states (e.g., Wyoming) providing DAO LLC statutes, while at the federal level the SEC and CFTC have taken a “quite aggressive” approach illustrated by The DAO and Ooki DAO cases.(rif.technology) This contrasts with the proactive, purpose‑built DAO laws in places like the Marshall Islands and the more permissive foundation regimes in Switzerland and Cayman.

Taken together, this supports the spirit of Friedberg’s concern that a lot of the formal development, domicile and regulatory experimentation around DAOs has happened outside the U.S.

Evidence that the U.S. has not clearly been “left behind” overall

• U.S. still leads in crypto venture capital and startup funding. Multiple VC surveys show that from 2023–2025 the U.S. has remained the largest destination for crypto and blockchain VC funding, routinely capturing around 45–50% of global crypto VC capital and the largest share of deals, with the rest split among Europe and Asia.(fundfa.com) This indicates U.S. investors are still a primary driver of funding for Web3/DAO projects, even if those projects later incorporate abroad.
• DAO ecosystem is global and not obviously dominated by any single jurisdiction. Large empirical studies of thousands of DAOs (covering treasuries, token holders and governance activity) describe a fast‑growing, globally distributed ecosystem with over 13,000 DAOs and tens of billions in treasuries as of 2024, but they do not identify a clear geographic leader or show that U.S. participation is lagging in absolute terms.(arxiv.org) Many headline DAOs—Uniswap, Compound, Aave governance, Optimism Collective, etc.—have substantial U.S. contributors, teams or investors even when their legal entities are offshore.
• Patchwork but non‑trivial U.S. progress on DAO law. While the federal government has been slow, several U.S. states (Wyoming, Vermont, Tennessee, Utah) have passed statutes allowing DAOs or blockchain LLCs, giving them legal personhood and limited liability under state law.(stinson.com) That is materially behind some offshore competitors, but it is not zero, and U.S. entities do make use of these structures.
• Recent U.S. policy pivot toward a more crypto‑friendly stance. After an aggressive enforcement period under the prior administration, the Trump administration in 2025 has shifted tone: major SEC cases against Coinbase and Binance have been dropped or wound down, and the federal government has advanced crypto‑specific laws such as the GENIUS Act and even a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve to signal support for the sector.(reuters.com) Industry voices now talk about the U.S. risking falling behind if it fails to act, not as a country that is already definitively out of the race.(en.coinotag.com)

Why the prediction is ambiguous rather than clearly right or wrong

• The prediction ties together two claims: (1) non‑US crypto investments will drive development and adoption of DAOs and related structures; and (2) this will cause the U.S. to be left behind other jurisdictions.
• On (1), the legal‑domicile and regulatory evidence strongly supports that many of the key legal and structural innovations for DAOs (foundations, DAO LLC frameworks, offshore wrappers) have been pioneered and adopted outside the U.S., in Switzerland/Zug, the Marshall Islands, Cayman and other hubs.(ccn.com) So that part looks directionally accurate.
• On (2), “left behind” is much harder to substantiate. The U.S.:
  • Remains the single largest source of crypto venture capital, suggesting its investors still drive a large share of funding for DAO‑adjacent projects.(fundfa.com)
  • Hosts many of the major teams and contributors building DAO protocols, even when their legal entities are foreign.
  • Has begun shifting toward more supportive national policy in 2025, which undercuts the notion of a persistent or irreversible loss of leadership.(reuters.com)

Because different dimensions of “leadership” point in opposite directions—legal domicile and regulatory clarity favor ex‑US jurisdictions, while capital and much of the technical ecosystem remain heavily U.S.‑centric—and because no standardized metric exists to show that the U.S. is clearly behind in DAOs overall, the outcome of Friedberg’s prediction is best classified as ambiguous rather than clearly right or wrong.