Coinbase CEO Backs CLARITY Act After Earlier Opposition – Senate Progress Remains Pending

Key Takeaways

Coinbase CEO Reverses Position on the CLARITY Act

Brian Armstrong, chief executive of Coinbase, has publicly expressed support for the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, also known as the CLARITY Act, after previously distancing the company from the legislation.

In a post published on X, Armstrong stated that “it’s time to pass the Clarity Act,” aligning himself with recent remarks by US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. Bessent had called on Congress to move forward with the bill in an opinion piece published in The Wall Street Journal.

Armstrong’s endorsement marks a change in position. In January, he said Coinbase could not support the bill “as written” ahead of a key committee vote. Following that statement, lawmakers in the Senate Banking Committee postponed a planned markup of the legislation, a necessary procedural step before it can advance.

According to Armstrong, the current draft reflects months of negotiations between lawmakers and representatives from the crypto and banking sectors. He described the updated version as a “strong bill,” indicating that earlier concerns had been addressed in subsequent revisions.

Legislative Status in the Senate

The CLARITY Act has faced procedural delays since the beginning of the year. Although the Senate Agriculture Committee approved the bill in January, further action is required in the Senate Banking Committee. Each committee oversees different regulatory areas, including aspects of securities and commodities law that affect digital assets.

As of Friday, no new markup had been scheduled in the Banking Committee. Both committees must complete their reviews before the legislation can move to a vote in the full Senate chamber.

Armstrong had previously indicated in January that he expected the bill to pass “in a few weeks.” However, progress stalled due to concerns raised during negotiations. Issues cited at the time included ethics provisions, tokenized equities and stablecoin yield mechanisms, as well as other crypto related regulatory questions.

Coinbase’s chief legal officer, Paul Grewal, said last week that lawmakers were “very close to a deal” on the legislation, suggesting that discussions are ongoing despite the lack of a scheduled markup.

Treasury Secretary Calls for Congressional Action

The renewed push for the CLARITY Act follows public comments from US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent. In his Wall Street Journal opinion piece, Bessent urged Congress to act on the crypto market structure bill without further delay.

Armstrong explicitly referenced Bessent’s position in his social media post, stating that Coinbase agreed with the Treasury Secretary’s call for action. The alignment between the Treasury Department and a major US crypto exchange highlights the broader institutional engagement surrounding the bill.

The debate over the CLARITY Act has drawn attention to the role of the crypto industry in Washington. Executives from Coinbase and Ripple Labs have participated in discussions with administration officials regarding the legislation. Armstrong reportedly met with US President Donald Trump prior to a social media message from the president calling for immediate action on crypto market structure reform.

Regulatory Developments for Coinbase

The legislative discussions coincide with recent regulatory approvals affecting Coinbase and other digital asset firms. Last week, the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency approved Coinbase’s application for a national bank trust charter.

In December, similar approvals were granted to Paxos, Ripple Labs, BitGo, Circle and Fidelity Digital Assets. These developments indicate ongoing regulatory activity at the federal level in parallel with congressional efforts to define crypto market structure.

For users of crypto platforms, including those evaluating services for trading, payments or online betting, the CLARITY Act is relevant because it addresses how digital assets may be classified and supervised under US law. The bill’s progress through Congress could influence how exchanges and related service providers operate within the existing financial regulatory framework.

Industry Influence and Political Context

Since before President Trump’s inauguration, observers have questioned the extent of the crypto industry’s influence on policy decisions in Washington. The involvement of senior executives from major digital asset companies in legislative discussions has intensified scrutiny of these relationships.

Armstrong’s meeting with the president and his public advocacy for the bill illustrate the active engagement of industry leaders in shaping regulatory outcomes. At the same time, the formal legislative process remains ongoing, with committee procedures and negotiations determining the pace of progress.

Our Assessment

Brian Armstrong’s renewed support for the CLARITY Act represents a shift from Coinbase’s earlier position and comes as negotiations in the Senate continue. The bill has cleared the Senate Agriculture Committee but awaits further action in the Senate Banking Committee. Public backing from the US Treasury Secretary and participation from major crypto firms underline the significance of the legislation within ongoing efforts to define US crypto market structure. For market participants and platform users, the outcome of the legislative process may shape the regulatory environment in which digital asset services operate.

Stacked Launches Self-Custodial Lightning Wallet – Expands Non-Custodial Bitcoin Access in New Zealand

Key Takeaways

Stacked Introduces Self-Custodial Wallet With Lightning Integration

Stacked, previously operating under the name Lightning Pay, has launched a self-custodial Bitcoin and Lightning wallet through its platform StackedBitcoin.com. The company describes the release as part of its strategy to make Bitcoin usable as everyday money rather than solely as a tradable asset held on custodial platforms.

The wallet is built with Breez and Spark SDKs on the back end and offers full Lightning Network integration. According to the company, users can manually purchase Bitcoin or set up recurring purchases through a feature called Autostack, which enables scheduled buying similar to dollar cost averaging.

In addition to holding and sending Bitcoin, users can manage contacts within the app and initiate payments in Bitcoin while recipients receive fiat currency. This functionality is supported by New Zealand’s Open Banking payments framework, which Stacked uses to settle fiat transfers to billers and landlords.

Positioning as a Non-Custodial Alternative in a Changing Market

Stacked operates as a four person company and states that it has experienced significant growth in recent years. Its latest product launch comes amid structural changes in the New Zealand crypto sector.

According to the report, EasyCrypto, a swap exchange that allowed users to send fiat and receive crypto directly into their own wallets, was acquired by SwyFTX and subsequently shut down. Its user base was directed to the parent custodial exchange. Other platforms, such as Sharesies, are described as following a model in which users cannot withdraw crypto assets to self-custodied wallets.

Stacked’s model differs in that users send fiat to the company and receive Bitcoin into a wallet they control. With the new wallet launch, the company combines its swap exchange service with a proprietary self-custody solution.

The company’s co founder and chief revenue officer, identified as Simon, stated that larger exchanges in the country are focusing on custodial and paper bitcoin products. Stacked’s approach centers on direct ownership and on chain or Lightning based transfers.

Bitcoin Payments for Bills and Rent via Open Banking

A central feature of the new wallet is its integration with New Zealand’s Open Banking payments framework. Through this system, users can pay utility bills or rent in Bitcoin. Stacked converts and settles the equivalent amount in fiat to the recipient.

This structure allows Bitcoin holders to use digital assets for routine expenses while interacting with counterparties who may not accept cryptocurrency directly. For users evaluating crypto platforms, the ability to bridge Bitcoin payments with fiat settlement can affect how funds are stored and used.

The wallet’s Lightning Network integration is designed to facilitate faster and lower cost transactions compared with standard on chain transfers. By combining swap services, Lightning functionality, and fiat settlement, Stacked links exchange activity with day to day spending tools.

New Zealand Crypto Usage and Tax Framework

The broader crypto market in New Zealand provides the context for Stacked’s expansion. In the 2025 financial year, 227,000 New Zealanders were identified as unique cryptoasset users. These users conducted approximately 7 million transactions over the period.

Local cryptocurrency exchange volumes reached about NZ$7.8 billion during the same timeframe. Stacked projects that the country’s digital asset market will generate revenue exceeding US$200 million in 2026.

The country does not apply a capital gains tax. Instead, Bitcoin profits are taxed as income. This tax treatment shapes how gains are reported and may influence how users structure their trading or spending activity.

According to 2024 research by Protocol Theory, nearly 50 percent of New Zealanders are current or prospective investors in Bitcoin and digital assets. This level of participation indicates a broad base of interest in crypto related products and services.

Focus on Local Circular Economy in Queenstown

Stacked has concentrated part of its efforts on what it calls the Bitcoin Basin in Queenstown, New Zealand. The area is described as a growing circular economy with Bitcoin accepting merchants.

The company has established a dedicated website for the community and hosts regular events aimed at encouraging local Bitcoin usage. By supporting merchant adoption and consumer payments, Stacked aligns its wallet launch with its stated objective of making Bitcoin usable as money within defined geographic areas.

For users comparing platforms, the presence of local merchant networks and fiat settlement options can influence decisions about which services provide practical spending functionality in addition to trading access.

Our Assessment

Stacked’s launch of a self-custodial Lightning wallet adds a new product to New Zealand’s crypto market at a time when several exchanges have moved toward custodial models or have consolidated operations. The company combines swap services, self custody, Lightning payments, and fiat settlement through Open Banking. With 227,000 identified crypto users and NZ$7.8 billion in exchange volumes in the 2025 financial year, the domestic market provides measurable activity levels against which such services operate. The development highlights a structural distinction between custodial and non-custodial offerings within New Zealand’s evolving crypto sector.

US Treasury Expands Cybersecurity Threat Intelligence to Crypto Firms – Digital Asset Platforms Gain Access to Federal Risk Data

Key Takeaways

Treasury Extends Cybersecurity Program to Digital Asset Companies

The US Department of the Treasury announced that its Office of Cybersecurity and Critical Infrastructure Protection is expanding a federal cybersecurity threat identification program to cover digital asset companies. Until now, the program primarily served traditional financial institutions.

Under the expansion, blockchain companies that choose to participate will receive the same cybersecurity threat intelligence as banks and other established financial entities. According to the Treasury, this information will be provided at no cost to participating firms.

Cory Wilson, deputy assistant secretary for cybersecurity at the Office of Cybersecurity and Critical Infrastructure Protection, stated that cyber threats targeting digital asset platforms are increasing in both frequency and sophistication. The expansion is designed to address those developments by integrating crypto firms more closely into existing federal threat sharing structures.

Policy Background: July 2025 Report on Digital Financial Technology

The initiative implements recommendations outlined in a July 2025 report titled “Strengthening American Leadership in Digital Financial Technology.” The report was issued under US President Donald Trump’s administration and focused on reinforcing the country’s position in digital finance.

By extending federal cybersecurity intelligence support to crypto businesses, the Treasury aligns digital asset infrastructure more closely with the regulatory and security frameworks applied to traditional finance. The announcement reflects a broader recognition that blockchain based platforms now form part of the financial system’s critical infrastructure.

Rising Financial Losses From DeFi Exploits

The decision comes amid continued financial losses from attacks on crypto platforms. According to data cited in the announcement, decentralized finance platform hacks resulted in nearly $169 million in losses during the first quarter of 2026 alone.

Between 2022 and 2025, the sector recorded significant cumulative losses from crypto related hacks. These figures highlight the persistent vulnerability of smart contract based protocols, centralized exchanges, and developer environments to cyber intrusion.

For users of crypto trading, staking, or betting platforms, such incidents can directly affect asset security, platform availability, and operational continuity. While the Treasury program does not mandate participation, it provides an additional source of threat intelligence to companies seeking to strengthen their defenses.

Drift Protocol Exploit Linked to Suspected State Affiliated Hackers

Recent events illustrate the type of threats the expanded program seeks to address. Drift Protocol, a decentralized cryptocurrency exchange, suffered a $280 million exploit in April 2026. According to a preliminary incident report from the company, the attack was carried out by suspected hackers affiliated with North Korea.

The Drift team reported that individuals who initially approached them at a major crypto industry conference were not North Korean nationals. However, the attackers allegedly maintained contact with the team for months following the event.

During that period, crypto stealing malware was deployed on developers’ machines. The malicious software was later activated in connection with the April exploit. The sequence of events demonstrates how social engineering and long term infiltration can precede large scale theft.

The Seals911 group, a team of blockchain cybersecurity specialists, assessed with medium high confidence that the attack was likely carried out by the same group responsible for the October 2024 hack of the Radiant Capital DeFi platform.

State Linked Cyber Threats and Industry Exposure

The Treasury’s announcement also reflects ongoing concerns about foreign intelligence operatives targeting crypto projects. State affiliated groups, including the North Korean linked Lazarus Group, have been associated with multiple high profile crypto attacks in recent years.

These operations often combine technical exploits with social engineering tactics. In the Drift case, direct in person contact at an industry event preceded the deployment of malware. Such methods expand the risk surface beyond code vulnerabilities to include human and operational factors.

For companies operating crypto exchanges, DeFi platforms, or crypto enabled betting services, this environment increases the importance of structured threat intelligence and coordinated response frameworks.

Implications for Digital Asset Platforms and Their Users

By granting crypto firms access to federal threat intelligence resources, the Treasury places digital asset businesses on a similar footing to banks in terms of information sharing. Participation remains voluntary, but the availability of no cost intelligence may lower barriers for smaller firms seeking institutional grade insights.

For users, including those active in crypto trading and online betting, the development signals closer integration of the crypto sector into national cybersecurity infrastructure. While it does not eliminate platform risk, it introduces an additional layer of coordination between public authorities and private operators.

The expansion also underscores the scale of recent losses and the operational sophistication of attackers targeting blockchain based services.

Our Assessment

The US Treasury has formally extended its cybersecurity threat identification program to digital asset companies, granting them access to the same intelligence provided to traditional financial institutions. The move follows policy recommendations from a July 2025 federal report and comes amid nearly $169 million in DeFi related losses in the first quarter of 2026. Recent incidents, including a $280 million exploit at Drift Protocol linked to suspected state affiliated hackers, illustrate the types of threats the initiative aims to address. The expansion integrates crypto platforms more directly into existing federal cybersecurity information sharing structures.

Morgan Stanley’s Bitcoin Trust Launches With $34 Million in Trading Volume – New Entrant Intensifies Fee Competition in Spot ETF Market

Key Takeaways

Morgan Stanley Enters the Spot Bitcoin ETF Market With MSBT

Morgan Stanley has launched its own spot Bitcoin exchange traded fund under the name Bitcoin Trust, trading under the ticker MSBT. The fund debuted with approximately $34 million in trading volume and about $30.6 million in net inflows, according to reported figures from its first day on the market.

The launch places Morgan Stanley among the established issuers offering spot Bitcoin ETFs in the United States. The product provides direct exposure to Bitcoin’s market price through a regulated exchange traded structure. Early inflows indicate initial demand, supported by the bank’s existing distribution network and wealth management presence.

For investors, including those who follow crypto related financial products as part of broader portfolio allocation decisions, the entry of a large financial institution adds another option within an already competitive segment.

Fee Set at 14 Basis Points as Cost Competition Continues

MSBT carries a management fee of 14 basis points. This level is lower than many existing spot Bitcoin ETF offerings and reflects an ongoing trend of fee compression in the sector.

Since the introduction of spot Bitcoin ETFs, issuers have reduced fees to attract assets and maintain market share. Lower costs can influence product selection, particularly for institutional investors and large allocators who compare expense ratios across competing funds. At the same time, declining fees increase pressure on issuers to achieve scale in order to sustain margins.

Morgan Stanley’s pricing decision positions MSBT as a lower cost alternative relative to several established products. The move contributes to intensifying competition among providers that are seeking to differentiate through cost, liquidity, and distribution reach.

Mixed Flow Data Across U.S. Spot Bitcoin ETFs

Despite the positive debut for MSBT, the broader U.S. spot Bitcoin ETF market recorded net outflows of approximately $94 million on the same day.

Several major funds experienced redemptions. Fidelity’s FBTC and Ark and 21Shares’ ARKB led the outflows, while Grayscale’s GBTC also reported losses. In contrast, BlackRock’s IBIT stood out with $40.4 million in inflows, reinforcing its position as a leading liquidity venue among spot Bitcoin ETFs.

These diverging flow patterns highlight differences in investor positioning across products. While some funds saw capital exit, others continued to attract new allocations, indicating that investor activity remains concentrated in specific vehicles.

For market participants, including those monitoring crypto exposure as part of diversified strategies, fund level flows can signal where liquidity and institutional interest are currently concentrated.

Bitcoin Price Movement Coincides With ETF Flow Shifts

Recent ETF flows occurred alongside notable price movements in the underlying asset. Bitcoin rebounded from levels near $67,800 to above $70,000, extending gains from the high $66,000 range into the low $70,000s.

The price move followed news of a temporary ceasefire related to tensions between the United States and Iran. Bitcoin briefly consolidated before pushing higher, reaching approximately $71,900 in recent trading.

Market participants have pointed to profit taking as a factor behind some of the ETF outflows. After the price recovery, certain institutional investors appear to have reduced exposure rather than increased positions. The combination of price volatility and geopolitical developments coincided with shifts in fund flows across multiple issuers.

For investors tracking both spot prices and ETF demand, these parallel movements illustrate how macro events and short term price changes can align with adjustments in capital allocation.

Competitive Landscape Remains Focused on Scale and Liquidity

The addition of MSBT introduces another large issuer into a market where scale and liquidity already play a central role. BlackRock’s IBIT continues to show consistent inflows and strong liquidity, supporting its standing among spot Bitcoin ETFs.

Current market structure suggests that leading funds with significant assets and trading activity maintain advantages in terms of visibility and liquidity. A sustained shift in market leadership would likely require consistent outflows from incumbent funds or substantial inflows into new entrants with competitive pricing and broad distribution.

The launch of MSBT reinforces the trend toward lower cost products and reflects the ongoing adjustment of pricing strategies across the sector. As more issuers compete on fees and distribution, investors face a growing number of structurally similar products differentiated primarily by cost and liquidity metrics.

Our Assessment

Morgan Stanley’s Bitcoin Trust entered the market with $34 million in trading volume and $30.6 million in net inflows, while setting a 14 basis point fee that undercuts many competitors. The launch occurred during a day of overall net outflows across U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs, with capital moving unevenly between major funds. Together, these developments show continued fee competition, shifting investor allocations, and sensitivity of ETF flows to recent Bitcoin price movements.

Bitcoin Depot ATM Operator Reports $3.6 Million in BTC Stolen – Corporate Hack Highlights Security Risks

Key Takeaways

Bitcoin Depot ATM Operator Confirms $3.6 Million Bitcoin Loss

A Bitcoin Depot ATM operator has reported that $3.6 million worth of Bitcoin was stolen in what the company described as a corporate hack. The incident was reported on April 8, 2026, and categorized as crypto-related news.

According to the report, the stolen assets were denominated in Bitcoin and amounted to $3.6 million. The company identified the event as a corporate hack, indicating that the breach affected internal systems rather than an isolated external transaction.

No additional operational details were included in the source material. The confirmed figure remains $3.6 million in Bitcoin.

Classification as a Corporate Hack

The company referred to the incident as a corporate hack. This classification distinguishes the event from other types of security issues, such as user-level account compromises or isolated wallet breaches. By labeling the event as corporate, the operator signaled that the breach occurred within its organizational infrastructure.

For readers who use crypto-related financial services, the distinction between individual account hacks and corporate-level breaches is relevant. A corporate hack suggests that internal systems were targeted, rather than a single end-user wallet or transaction.

The source material does not provide further technical details about the method of attack or the systems involved. The confirmed information remains that $3.6 million in Bitcoin was stolen and that the company described the incident as a corporate hack.

Implications for Crypto ATM Operators

The reported loss concerns a Bitcoin Depot ATM operator. Crypto ATM operators provide physical access points for buying or selling digital assets, including Bitcoin. In this case, the operator disclosed a loss linked to a corporate security breach.

For users who rely on crypto ATMs to convert cash into digital assets or vice versa, security practices at the corporate level are a central consideration. While the report does not describe customer impact or operational disruptions, the confirmed theft underscores that operators managing digital assets can be targets of cyber incidents.

The only quantified detail available is the amount reported stolen: $3.6 million in Bitcoin. No additional figures, timelines, or recovery information were included in the source material.

Why the Report Matters for Crypto Platform Users

For international users evaluating crypto-related services, including exchanges, betting platforms, or payment providers, reported security incidents form part of the broader risk landscape. A corporate hack involving millions of dollars in Bitcoin highlights that digital asset operators continue to face security threats.

The reported amount, $3.6 million, reflects a substantial sum in Bitcoin terms. The classification of the event as a corporate hack places the focus on internal infrastructure security rather than on individual user error.

The source material does not state whether law enforcement was involved, whether funds were recovered, or whether customer accounts were affected. The confirmed facts remain limited to the reported theft amount and the company’s description of the event.

Our Assessment

Based on the available information, a Bitcoin Depot ATM operator reported that $3.6 million in Bitcoin was stolen in a corporate hack. The case was reported on April 8, 2026, in the crypto category. The confirmed facts establish the scale of the reported loss and the classification of the breach as corporate in nature. No further operational or technical details were included in the source material.

US Treasury Advances GENIUS Act Implementation – Stablecoin Issuers Face Bank Secrecy Act and Sanctions Compliance Requirements

Key Takeaways

Treasury and OFAC Propose Rule Targeting Illicit Finance in Stablecoin Payments

The US Treasury Department has taken a further step in implementing the GENIUS Act by publishing a joint proposed rule through its Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and the Office of Foreign Assets Control. The proposal focuses on reducing illicit finance risks linked to payment stablecoins.

According to the notice, payment stablecoin issuers in the United States would be required to establish and maintain anti money laundering and countering the financing of terrorism programs. In addition, issuers would need to implement sanctions compliance measures in line with OFAC requirements.

A central element of the proposal is the obligation for issuers to have the operational capacity to block, freeze, and reject certain transactions. This requirement would apply in cases involving sanctions, suspicious activity, or other legal triggers defined under US financial law.

For users of crypto payment systems, including those transferring stablecoins to online platforms, this framework signals stricter transaction oversight at the issuer level. Stablecoin transfers could be subject to intervention if they fall within the scope of sanctions or AML enforcement.

Stablecoin Issuers to Be Treated as Financial Institutions Under the Bank Secrecy Act

Under the proposed rule, payment stablecoin issuers would be classified as financial institutions for purposes of the Bank Secrecy Act. This classification would align them with entities such as banks in terms of compliance expectations.

Being brought under full BSA and OFAC compliance would require issuers to adopt formal risk management structures, reporting systems, and monitoring mechanisms. The Treasury’s move reflects the broader aim of integrating stablecoin activity into the existing US financial compliance architecture.

Snir Levi, CEO of blockchain intelligence firm Nominis, told Cointelegraph that bringing issuers into full BSA and OFAC compliance effectively turns them into bank like gatekeepers. According to Levi, this could result in a higher number of wallet freezes, blocked transactions, and asset seizures executed at scale.

For crypto users, this classification changes how stablecoins are positioned within the regulatory landscape. Rather than operating solely as blockchain based instruments, payment stablecoins would be subject to oversight similar to traditional financial intermediaries.

GENIUS Act Framework and Timeline for Implementation

The GENIUS Act, described as a stablecoin payments bill, was signed into law by US President Donald Trump in July 2025. The law establishes a federal framework for stablecoin issuers operating in the United States.

The legislation is set to take effect 18 months after it was signed into law or 120 days after federal authorities issue related implementing regulations, whichever comes first. The current proposed rule from Treasury and OFAC forms part of that regulatory rollout.

In parallel, the US Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation has issued its own proposed rule under the GENIUS Act framework. The FDIC stated that stablecoin holders would not be insured under the bill. However, reserve deposits held by issuers would receive protection.

This distinction clarifies that while issuers’ backing reserves may benefit from deposit insurance safeguards, individuals holding stablecoins would not receive direct insurance coverage on their token balances.

Congressional Debate Continues on Broader Digital Asset Framework

While federal agencies move ahead with implementing the GENIUS Act, progress on a broader digital asset market structure bill remains stalled in Congress. The bill, referred to as the CLARITY Act when it passed the House of Representatives last year, has not yet advanced in the Senate.

The Senate Banking Committee has not scheduled a markup on the CLARITY Act, a necessary step before a full vote in the chamber. At the same time, representatives from the crypto and banking sectors have met with White House officials to discuss issues including stablecoin yield, tokenized equities, and ethics.

The White House’s Council of Economic Advisers stated that a proposed ban on stablecoin yield in the bill would do very little to protect bank lending and would impose costs on users. As of the latest update, the Senate Banking Committee had not rescheduled a markup session.

For market participants, this means that while stablecoin specific rules are advancing under the GENIUS Act, the wider legal framework for digital assets remains under legislative discussion.

Our Assessment

The Treasury’s proposed rule represents a concrete step in integrating payment stablecoin issuers into the US financial compliance system. By requiring AML, CFT, and sanctions programs and by classifying issuers as financial institutions under the Bank Secrecy Act, the GENIUS Act framework increases regulatory oversight of stablecoin transactions. At the same time, related measures by the FDIC clarify the limits of insurance protection for holders and issuers. Together, these actions define how stablecoin payments will be supervised under US law once the implementation timeline is completed.

White House Economic Analysis Finds Stablecoin Yield Ban Offers Limited Support for Bank Lending

Key Takeaways

White House Model Challenges Core Argument for Yield Ban

The White House Council of Economic Advisers has released an economic analysis assessing the impact of prohibiting yield payments on stablecoins. The findings question a central justification for the current legal restriction.

Under the GENIUS Act, signed into law in July 2025, stablecoin issuers must hold reserves on a one to one basis. Each dollar in circulation must be backed by assets such as Treasury bills, cash, or money market funds. The law also prohibits issuers from paying interest or yield to stablecoin holders.

Supporters of the prohibition have argued that if stablecoins were allowed to offer returns comparable to savings accounts, households could shift funds from bank deposits into digital tokens. According to that view, banks would lose a key source of funding, potentially reducing their lending capacity. Some academic estimates suggested lending could contract by as much as $1.5 trillion, particularly affecting community banks.

The Council of Economic Advisers built a model to test these assumptions. Its conclusion states that a yield prohibition would do very little to protect bank lending, while eliminating potential consumer benefits from competitive returns on stablecoin holdings.

Estimated Lending Impact Remains Marginal

According to the White House analysis, banning stablecoin yield under current conditions would increase total bank lending by approximately $2.1 billion. Against a $12 trillion loan book, this represents a change of 0.02 percent.

At the same time, consumers would forgo an estimated $800 million in returns. The report calculates a cost benefit ratio of 6.6, meaning the economic cost to consumers would exceed the projected lending gains by more than six times.

The analysis attributes the limited impact to the way stablecoin reserves are managed. When users convert dollars into stablecoins, issuers typically invest the reserves in Treasury bills, repurchase agreements, and money market funds. These funds move through dealers and counterparties and re enter the broader financial system.

The Council examined three balance sheet scenarios and found that in the most common cases, aggregate deposits across the banking system remain largely unchanged. Funds may shift between institutions, but they do not disappear from the system.

A key variable in the model is the proportion of stablecoin reserves that are effectively removed from lending channels. Based on Circle’s December 2025 reserve report for USDC, the Council calibrated this share at 12 percent. Tether, according to the same report, holds $34 million in bank deposits against a $147 billion reserve pool, implying that the vast majority of reserves are not parked as idle bank deposits.

Role of Excess Liquidity and Monetary Conditions

The report also considers the broader monetary environment. It notes that banks currently hold more than $1.1 trillion in excess liquidity above regulatory minimums. In such conditions, deposit shifts between institutions do not force banks to contract lending because they maintain significant buffers.

The model indicates that under a different monetary framework, the outcome could be larger. If the Federal Reserve were operating with scarce reserves and several additional assumptions held simultaneously, the lending increase from a yield ban could reach $531 billion. However, the Council describes the required combination of conditions as implausible. These include a stablecoin market six times larger relative to its current size, a complete shift of reserves into locked deposits, high substitution between savings accounts and stablecoins, and a change in the Federal Reserve’s operating framework.

Existing Workarounds and Legislative Gaps

Although the GENIUS Act prohibits issuers from paying yield directly to stablecoin holders, the report highlights that third parties are not explicitly barred from offering rewards.

Coinbase, for example, offers USDC Rewards to customers who hold the token in its wallets. These rewards are funded through a revenue sharing agreement with Circle. As of February 2026, the rewards match rates on high yield savings accounts, reflecting underlying returns on Treasury assets.

Some versions of the proposed CLARITY Act would extend the prohibition to intermediaries, preventing them from passing yield to holders. The report notes that whether such measures would withstand political and legal scrutiny remains unresolved.

International Usage and Treasury Market Effects

The Council also addresses the international dimension of stablecoin adoption. More than 80 percent of stablecoin transactions occur outside the United States. Many users in countries with weak currencies or limited banking access use dollar backed tokens as savings tools.

Stablecoin issuers collectively hold more Treasury bills than certain sovereign nations, including Saudi Arabia. Research from the Bank for International Settlements cited in the report found that stablecoin inflows compress short term Treasury yields. This dynamic contributes to lower borrowing costs for the US government.

The Council did not quantify how a yield prohibition might affect foreign demand for stablecoins. However, it notes that reduced adoption could influence this channel of Treasury demand.

Our Assessment

The White House Council of Economic Advisers concludes that under current market and monetary conditions, prohibiting stablecoin yield produces only marginal gains for bank lending while imposing measurable costs on consumers. The analysis also highlights structural features of stablecoin reserve management, existing reward mechanisms through intermediaries, and the significant international role of stablecoins in Treasury markets. For users evaluating stablecoin based services, the findings clarify how federal policy interacts with banking liquidity, reserve structures, and potential returns on digital dollar holdings.

SEC Says Certain Crypto Enforcement Cases Delivered No Investor Benefit – Agency Signals Shift Toward Targeted Oversight

Key Takeaways

SEC Acknowledges Limited Investor Impact in Some Crypto Cases

The US Securities and Exchange Commission has stated that several past enforcement actions against cryptocurrency companies did not deliver a clear benefit to investors. In a statement outlining its enforcement results for 2025, the agency said that certain cases identified no direct investor harm and produced no measurable investor protection.

According to the SEC, since the 2022 fiscal year it brought 95 actions and imposed 2.3 billion dollars in penalties for book and record violations. The agency noted that, together with seven crypto firm registration related cases and six cases concerning the definition of a dealer, these actions did not demonstrate direct investor harm or tangible investor benefit.

The SEC described this pattern as reflecting a bias toward the volume of cases brought rather than a focus on investor protection. It also referred to what it called a misallocation of resources and a misinterpretation of federal securities laws in certain instances.

For crypto market participants, including exchanges, token issuers, and service providers, this acknowledgment signals a reassessment of how enforcement effectiveness is measured. The agency indicated that enforcement outcomes will be evaluated more closely against their actual contribution to investor protection.

Leadership Change Marks Shift Away From Regulation by Enforcement

The change in tone follows the appointment of Paul Atkins as SEC Chair in April 2025. His predecessor, Gary Gensler, had been associated with a regulation by enforcement approach toward digital asset companies.

In its statement, the SEC said that in the period leading up to Donald Trump’s 2025 inauguration, the enforcement division engaged in what it described as an unprecedented rush to bring cases. It also referred to an aggressive pursuit of novel legal theories during that time.

Under Atkins, the agency said it has shifted its focus from the number of cases filed to the quality and impact of enforcement actions. The stated goal is to prioritize misconduct that causes the greatest harm, including fraud, market manipulation, and abuses of trust.

Atkins said resources have been redirected toward cases that strengthen market integrity and provide meaningful investor protection. The agency also stated that it is moving away from approaches that emphasized record setting penalties and headline figures.

For crypto companies and users, including those operating or using crypto based betting and gaming platforms, enforcement priorities can influence compliance expectations, registration requirements, and operational risk. A clearer focus on fraud and market manipulation may affect how regulators assess token offerings, trading practices, and capital raising activities.

Enforcement Activity Declines but Monetary Relief Remains High

Data cited from consulting firm Cornerstone Research shows that under Atkins, the number of enforcement actions against public companies, including crypto related cases, declined by about 30 percent in fiscal 2025 compared with fiscal 2024.

Despite the lower case count, the SEC reported obtaining 17.9 billion dollars in monetary relief in connection with 2025 enforcement actions. This total included 7.2 billion dollars in civil penalties, with the remainder consisting of disgorgement and prejudgment interest.

The agency said that its 2025 results re establish what it considers the proper definition and measure of enforcement effectiveness. It emphasized alignment with Congress’ original intent and a focus on actions that prevent investor harm rather than generating large penalty figures.

For market observers, the combination of fewer cases and substantial monetary relief indicates that the SEC is concentrating on selected cases with significant financial consequences, rather than pursuing a broad range of technical or registration based violations.

Crypto Enforcement Continues in Fraud and Misconduct Cases

Although the SEC acknowledged shortcomings in certain past cases, enforcement against crypto related misconduct has not stopped.

In May 2025, the SEC sued Unicoin and four of its current and former executives. The agency alleged that the company raised 100 million dollars by misleading investors about certificates that purported to convey rights to receive Unicoin tokens and stock. The platform has accused the SEC of distorting its regulatory statements in building the case.

In a separate matter, the SEC filed a civil complaint in April 2025 against Ramil Ventura Palafox, CEO of Praetorian Group International. The agency alleged that he orchestrated a 200 million dollar Ponzi scheme. A parallel criminal case brought by the US Department of Justice resulted in Palafox being sentenced to 20 years in prison in February.

These cases indicate that while the SEC is reassessing certain categories of enforcement actions, it continues to pursue cases involving alleged fraud and large scale investor losses.

Our Assessment

The SEC’s statement formally recognizes that some past crypto related enforcement actions did not demonstrate direct investor harm or measurable investor benefit. Under new leadership, the agency reports a reduction in the number of cases filed and a shift toward prioritizing fraud, market manipulation, and misconduct that affects market integrity. At the same time, significant monetary penalties and active cases against crypto firms show that enforcement remains a central regulatory tool in the digital asset sector.