Crypto Breaking

Movement Labs, the team behind the Movement Ethereum layer-2 blockchain, has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the US Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware, according to court records. The filing, made July 15, uses Subchapter V—an expedited reorganization track intended for qualifying small businesses—while the company restructures under court supervision.
The court has already approved interim requests that allow Movement Labs to keep operating through the process. Those approvals include maintaining bank accounts and cash management systems, along with access to debtor-in-possession (DIP) financing to fund continued operations. Creditors have until Sept. 14 to submit claims.
Key takeaways
Movement Labs filed for Chapter 11 under Subchapter V, enabling continued operations while it restructures.
Interim court approvals cover cash handling and DIP financing to support day-to-day operations during bankruptcy.
The petition applies to Movement Labs only, according to Move Industries CEO Torab Torabi.
Multiple earlier setbacks tied to MOVE token trading and market-making concerns preceded the bankruptcy filing.
Court-supervised reorganization begins under Subchapter V
In its Chapter 11 filing, Movement Labs sought protection as it reorganizes following a period of disruption for the Movement ecosystem. The petition was filed July 15 in the District of Delaware and placed the company under court oversight, with Subchapter V designed to streamline the path to reorganization for eligible businesses.
Per the court approvals reported in the filing process, Movement Labs was allowed to continue using its banking and cash management arrangements. The court also authorized debtor-in-possession financing—an important step in Chapter 11 cases because it can help preserve operational continuity while liabilities are addressed.
The timeline for creditors is set at Sept. 14 to file claims, giving holders of potential debts a defined window to participate in the bankruptcy process.
What “Chapter 11” means for the ecosystem
After the bankruptcy filing became public, Move Industries CEO Torab Torabi clarified that the court protection applies only to Movement Labs. Torabi wrote on X that Move Industries—described as having taken over development and operations of the Movement ecosystem—continues to operate normally.
Earlier coverage and Movement’s own communications indicate that Move Industries assumed responsibility for development and operations from Movement Labs in December 2025, through a transfer described in a post on the Movement Network website: Movement Network Foundation and Move Industries announce completion of.
That distinction matters for readers trying to separate the corporate entity in bankruptcy from the broader project. While Chapter 11 may affect contracts, liabilities, and certain company-held assets, it does not automatically mean all ecosystem activity halts—especially where another operator is already handling development and operations.
A market-making controversy and listing actions preceded the filing
Movement Labs’ bankruptcy comes after months of controversy connected to the launch of Movement’s MOVE token and a market-making agreement that drew scrutiny.
According to earlier reporting from Cointelegraph, Movement Labs suspended co-founder Rushi Manche in May 2025 over a deal he helped broker with Web3Port. The market maker reportedly received 66 million MOVE—about 5% of the token’s supply—and later sold the holdings. Cointelegraph noted this was followed by an independent investigation, with the reported sales creating downward pressure on the token’s price.
Cointelegraph also reported that Coinbase suspended trading for MOVE later in May 2025 after determining the token no longer met its listing standards, while review into the market-making arrangement was ongoing.
In the period since those events, the MOVE token faced prolonged weakness. Cointelegraph cited a continued decline, stating the token has fallen more than 94% over the past year to roughly $0.01. The article referenced CoinGecko for the one-year price chart: CoinGecko.
Investors and users: what to watch next
Chapter 11 filings often signal the beginning of a longer restructuring process, and this one is likely to add a layer of legal complexity to questions around Movement Labs’ obligations and any assets under its control. Even if Move Industries continues operating, the bankruptcy proceedings can still influence how related contracts are handled and how remaining stakeholders are treated.
With creditors now having until Sept. 14 to file claims, the next steps worth monitoring are the bankruptcy court’s ongoing approvals, the scope of DIP financing over time, and whether subsequent filings clarify what parties will be prioritized during restructuring.
This article was originally published as Movement Labs Files for Chapter 11 as MOVE Token Turmoil Persists on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Balaji Srinivasan’s Network School is looking to expand into Kazakhstan after regulators moved against its Malaysia operations, according to a memorandum of understanding announced by Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Digital Development, Innovation and Aerospace Industry. The deal, signed with minister Zhaslan Madiyev, aims to establish what the ministry describes as the first Network School campus in the country.
The Kazakhstan announcement comes as Network School’s Forest City-area presence faces escalating regulatory pressure. Malaysia’s local authorities revoked the business license of the operator, NSO Malaysia Sdn Bhd, prompting the Malaysia Digital Economy Corporation (MDEC) to begin steps to remove the company’s Malaysia Digital status. The situation raises the question of how easily Network School can restart and maintain immigration- and incentives-related arrangements across borders.
Key takeaways
Kazakhstan’s ministry says it has signed an MoU with Balaji Srinivasan to create the first Network School campus in the country.
Malaysia’s Iskandar Puteri City Council revoked NSO Malaysia Sdn Bhd’s business license over alleged licensing and premises-use breaches.
MDEC says it is taking immediate steps to revoke NSO Malaysia’s Malaysia Digital status, which comes with benefits such as tax incentives and employment flexibility.
Local officials in Johor have urged federal authorities to keep investigating whether Network School violated immigration laws.
Srinivasan has framed the developments as consistent with the “network state” concept, while also saying Malaysia issues are being addressed through a remedial process.
Kazakhstan MoU opens a new front for Network School
In a statement from Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Digital Development, Innovation and Aerospace Industry, the government said an MoU was signed with Zhaslan Madiyev and Network School founder Balaji Srinivasan to establish a campus in Kazakhstan. While the document signals a strategic expansion, details of implementation—such as timeline, campus location, and regulatory steps—were not included in the provided reporting.
Network School’s Kazakhstan pivot matters for prospective residents and investors because campus operations are closely tied to host-country regulatory conditions, especially around visas, employment rules, and corporate status benefits. Srinivasan has previously described Network School as a community built around attracting globally distributed talent and capital, and the Kazakhstan proposal positions the group to potentially preserve momentum rather than waiting for a resolution in Malaysia.
Kazakhstan has also been positioning itself as a technology hub, including plans connected to a “crypto city” in Alatau, as referenced in the source material. Against that backdrop, Network School’s presence could be marketed as part of a broader attempt to draw innovation-driven communities and companies to the region.
Malaysia: revoked license and a threat to Malaysia Digital status
Malaysia’s regulatory actions began after the Iskandar Puteri City Council (MBIP) revoked the business license of NSO Malaysia Sdn Bhd, the entity operating the Network School’s Johor-area campus. MBIP cited alleged breaches of licensing conditions and requirements related to how premises were used, according to a report linked in the source material from mediadigitaljohor.gov.my.
Following the license revocation, MDEC announced it was taking immediate steps to revoke NSO Malaysia’s Malaysia Digital status. The Malaysia Digital program recognizes qualified technology and digital companies and is described in the source material as offering incentives such as tax advantages, ownership flexibility, and permission to employ both local and foreign workers—benefits that can be critical for international communities that rely on a steady inflow of talent.
MDEC’s stated rationale is that Malaysia Digital status requires companies to comply with local and federal laws. Removing that status could complicate Network School’s ability to operate smoothly if the campus depends on the program’s employment and incentives framework.
Johor officials push for immigration-law scrutiny
The stakes extend beyond corporate licensing. The source material says Johor Chief Minister Onn Hafiz Ghazi urged Malaysia’s federal authorities to continue investigating whether Network School violated immigration laws. He characterized Johor as a “strategic entry point” because the state borders Singapore and therefore argued that any weaknesses or abuse of the immigration system should be addressed promptly and firmly.
That emphasis highlights a common tension for border-adjacent technology hubs: even when a concept has strong global appeal, enforcement actions tied to immigration compliance can quickly affect day-to-day operations, staffing, and residency arrangements for community members.
Earlier coverage referenced in the source material indicates that scrutiny has been ongoing, including questions about how the campus fits within existing legal frameworks. The current license revocation and the potential loss of Malaysia Digital status suggest authorities are not treating the matter as purely procedural.
Srinivasan denies shutdown claims and points to remediation
As the regulatory situation unfolded, Srinivasan denied reports that Network School was shutting down. According to the linked social media statement in the source material, he said Network School had received two notices: one reportedly requiring “change the text of a sign,” and another related to a coworking setup formed by combining two adjacent units, where one side had a valid license but the other did not.
Srinivasan said the issues fell within a remedial period and that the organization would remediate them, adding that its members were otherwise unaffected. Cointelegraph also notes that it reached out to Srinivasan and Network School for comment, but the provided text does not include any additional responses beyond the denial and remediation framing.
Interpreting these statements alongside the MBIP and MDEC actions reveals an important asymmetry: public guidance from local authorities and program administrators may move faster than a company’s internal remediation plan. In practical terms, even if a remedial path exists on paper, the uncertainty can still disrupt hiring, occupancy, and community planning—especially for international residents who rely on predictable compliance timelines.
Meanwhile, Dragonfly Capital managing partner Haseeb Qureshi, quoted in the source material, linked the “Malaysia drama” to the broader “network state” argument. He suggested that the outcome could be used to negotiate new arrangements with other jurisdictions—an interpretation Srinivasan appears to be leaning into as the Kazakhstan MoU emerges.
What to watch next for Network School
Readers should focus on two tracks as the story develops: whether MDEC’s Malaysia Digital revocation proceeds and how quickly Malaysia’s immigration inquiries translate into enforceable outcomes, and—on the other side—how Kazakhstan operationalizes the MoU into concrete regulatory approvals for a Network School campus. Until those details are clear, Network School’s ability to retain its community and recruitment momentum will likely depend on jurisdiction-by-jurisdiction compliance rather than a single global brand narrative.
This article was originally published as Kazakhstan Signs Network School Deal as Malaysia Revokes License on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Balaji Srinivasan’s Network School is looking to plant a new campus in Kazakhstan after regulatory pressure in Malaysia forced its Johor operation to halt. The move comes via a memorandum of understanding (MoU) between Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Digital Development, Innovation and Aerospace Industry and Srinivasan, signaling a rapid attempt to preserve the project’s cross-border footprint.
The Kazakhstan agreement positions Network School for a fresh base following actions that disrupted its local operations in Johor. Kazakhstan has been actively courting technology and digital-industry activity, including plans for a Central Asia “crypto city” in Alatau—an environment that Network School appears eager to tap.
Key takeaways
Network School signed an MoU in Kazakhstan, potentially creating its first local campus there.
Malaysia’s Johor authorities revoked the business license of NSO Malaysia Sdn Bhd, the operator behind Network School’s Forest City-linked presence.
Malaysia Digital status is under immediate review, since the operator’s Malaysia Digital recognition is tied to compliance with local and federal laws.
Srinivasan says the Kazakhstan campus will focus on talent attraction, including expedited visas and streamlined redomiciliation.
Kazakhstan MoU offers a fallback for Network School’s expansion
According to a ministry statement, Kazakhstan’s Ministry of Digital Development, Innovation and Aerospace Industry signed an MoU with Balaji Srinivasan to establish the first Network School campus in the country. The memorandum was signed by Zhaslan Madiyev on behalf of the ministry and Srinivasan on the Network School side.
For the project, the timing matters. Network School’s Kazakhstan plan appears framed as continuity after setbacks in Malaysia. The article also notes that Kazakhstan has been positioning itself as an emerging technology hub, and references ambitions such as a Central Asia “crypto city” in Alatau—suggesting regulators and policymakers there may be more receptive to experiments that sit near the boundary between technology policy and digital-asset culture.
Srinivasan described the new campus as a place designed to accelerate onboarding for participants. In a post dated Tuesday on X, he said the campus would offer a “haven for global techno-optimism,” including expedited visas, streamlined redomiciliation, and active recruitment of talent.
Malaysia regulatory action escalates: license revocation and Malaysia Digital review
Network School’s Kazakhstan pivot follows multiple regulatory developments in Malaysia. On Tuesday, the Iskandar Puteri City Council (MBIP) revoked the business license of NSO Malaysia Sdn Bhd, which operates Network School. The revocation was linked to alleged breaches of licensing conditions and premises-use requirements.
The Malaysia Digital Economy Corporation (MDEC), which oversees the “Malaysia Digital” program, then announced immediate steps to revoke the operator’s Malaysia Digital status. Malaysia Digital recognition is granted to eligible technology and digital companies and, as described in the source coverage, can come with incentives such as tax benefits, flexibility around ownership, and the ability to employ local and foreign workers.
Crucially, the program also requires licensees to comply with local and federal laws. With NSO Malaysia’s license revoked, MDEC’s move indicates the regulator is treating the Malaysia Digital designation as contingent on continued lawful operations.
Johor politics and immigration scrutiny widen the dispute
Beyond the licensing issue, the dispute has also pulled in higher-level political attention. The source reports that Onn Hafiz Ghazi, Chief Minister of Johor, urged Malaysia’s federal authorities to continue investigating whether Network School violated immigration laws. He framed Johor as a “strategic entry point” due to the state’s proximity to Singapore, arguing that any weaknesses or misuse of the immigration system should be addressed promptly and firmly.
This matters for Network School because its model—bringing in global “digital nomads” and hosting a dense community of talent—depends on predictable pathways for visas, residency changes, and compliance. When immigration questions enter the picture, the risk is not only reputational; it can directly affect members’ ability to travel, work, or remain in the country.
The source also indicates that Srinivasan pushed back on reports that Network School was shutting down. On Friday, he denied the closures, saying the project had received two notices: one requiring a sign’s wording to be changed, and another related to a coworking setup created by joining two adjacent units. He said one side of that arrangement had a valid license while the other did not, and claimed the group had a remedial period to address both issues.
According to Srinivasan, members were otherwise unaffected during that remedial window. Cointelegraph reported that it reached out to Srinivasan and Network School for comment, but the article’s account focuses primarily on the regulatory steps already taken by the local council and MDEC.
What changes—and what remains uncertain—if Network School relocates
The Kazakhstan MoU suggests Network School wants to avoid a prolonged pause by securing an alternative operating base quickly. But an agreement is not the same as full operational clearance. Readers should view the MoU as a framework for collaboration and campus establishment, while awaiting more detailed information on licensing, immigration logistics, and the practical timeline for opening.
Still, the contrast between Malaysia and Kazakhstan is instructive. In Malaysia, the dispute moved from licensing conditions to a broader discussion involving Malaysia Digital compliance and immigration law scrutiny. In Kazakhstan, the present reporting centers on cooperation and talent-attraction features—expedited visas and streamlined redomiciliation—language that typically signals a focus on easing administrative friction.
For investors, builders, and community operators watching the “network state” concept, the underlying takeaway may be how regulatory pressure in one jurisdiction can accelerate relocation tactics. A community anchored in one place can gain momentum, but it is also exposed: local licensing, premises rules, and immigration enforcement can rapidly reshape operating reality. Network School’s next steps in Kazakhstan will therefore function as a real-world test of whether the administrative environment for techno-nomad hubs can be replicated across borders.
As the Kazakhstan campus planning progresses, the most important thing to watch is how the MoU translates into concrete permits and member onboarding on the ground—particularly on visas and local compliance. Until then, Network School’s situation remains a moving target shaped by how regulators interpret licensing, premises usage, and immigration obligations in each country.
This article was originally published as Balaji Network School Expands to Kazakhstan After Malaysia Setback on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

US lawmakers used a House Agriculture Subcommittee hearing this week to press the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) on oversight of sports event prediction market platforms—while also pointing to a pending Senate effort, the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act, as a potential source of clearer authority and funding.
At the hearing titled “Examining Customer Protections and Market Integrity in Sports Event Prediction Markets,” Carl Kennedy, a partner at law firm Katten Muchin Rosenman, argued that the CFTC may be unable to fully regulate and enforce rules for rapidly expanding prediction markets, citing staffing constraints. Kennedy said the CLARITY Act could expand the agency’s jurisdiction beyond digital assets and help it address the “explosive growth” of prediction markets.
Key takeaways
Carl Kennedy told the House Agriculture Subcommittee that the CFTC is likely “short-staffed” to effectively oversee prediction market platforms.
Kennedy said the CLARITY Act could grant the CFTC additional authority covering not only digital assets but also the fast-growing prediction market sector.
CFTC Chair Michael Selig has argued the agency has “exclusive jurisdiction” over event contracts on major prediction platforms, treating them as “swaps.”
State regulators have increasingly challenged that federal position, including through lawsuits and court disputes involving platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket.
Senate supporters of the CLARITY Act expect the bill text to be released soon, but details on prediction market provisions were not publicly available as of Tuesday.
Why lawmakers are focusing on prediction market oversight
The hearing, chaired around customer protections and market integrity in sports event prediction markets, highlighted how the legal and regulatory question has shifted from whether prediction platforms can operate to who is responsible for regulating them.
Kennedy’s core point was that even if the CFTC has jurisdiction, it may not have the resources to supervise new and complex markets at the pace they are growing. He suggested that an expanded mandate under the CLARITY Act would need to be paired with additional capacity so the agency can handle oversight and enforcement across cash markets and crypto as well as prediction markets.
“With additional resources… to address these new asset classes in the cash markets and crypto… as well as to deal with the explosive growth of prediction markets, I think that the CFTC certainly should receive additional resources,” Kennedy said during the Tuesday hearing.
The subcommittee discussion also reflected that prediction markets—often built on event contracts linked to real-world outcomes—have become a regulatory stress test for existing derivatives rules, especially as platforms attract broader participation.
The CFTC’s “exclusive jurisdiction” position under scrutiny
Legal and regulatory experts at the hearing referenced the CFTC’s approach under Chair Michael Selig, who was confirmed by the Senate in December and is the only Senate-confirmed member heading the commission in a leadership panel that would normally include five commissioners.
Since taking the role, Selig has taken the position that the CFTC has “exclusive jurisdiction” over prediction market companies. The argument is that the event contracts on these platforms fall under the CFTC’s authority because they can be classified as “swaps.”
This stance has drawn criticism—particularly from Democratic senators—who have described it as an “assault” on state authority to regulate prediction markets.
That federal-versus-state tension has produced a growing body of litigation. Some states have pursued lawsuits against platforms including Kalshi and Polymarket over what they see as state-level sports betting concerns.
State court clashes and the path toward the Supreme Court
One recent flashpoint involved a dispute where the CFTC chair’s position came into direct conflict with a state court ruling. Last week, Selig ordered Kalshi to ignore a Michigan court decision, according to prior coverage, with Kalshi arguing that the directive placed it in an “impossible position” between federal and state authorities.
More broadly, experts have suggested that the legal conflict between state regulators and the CFTC could eventually end up before the US Supreme Court. That possibility centers on the same foundational question raised by lawmakers: whether the CFTC’s reading of its jurisdiction leaves room for states to regulate event contracting tied to sports and related forms of wagering.
For market participants, this matters because jurisdiction affects compliance obligations, product design decisions, and the legal risk profile of operating in different states. For consumers, it affects who sets the rules for customer protections and how those rules are enforced—particularly when the platforms operate nationwide.
What the CLARITY Act could change—and what remains unclear
Much of Tuesday’s discussion pointed toward the CLARITY Act as the most significant potential legislative change on the horizon. Republican senators pushing for a vote before August recess have indicated they expect to release the bill’s text soon.
As of Tuesday, details of how the CLARITY Act would address prediction markets, ethics provisions, and other concerns raised by lawyers were not yet public.
However, earlier reporting indicates there is active political pressure to shape the bill’s scope. In June, gambling industry groups petitioned the Senate to add language to CLARITY that would explicitly prohibit event contracts tied to sports and casino-style gaming. Separately, reports cited by earlier coverage said the White House had confirmed that the Trump administration agreed to ethics provisions described as comprehensive, while also accommodating Democrats’ concerns.
That mix—requests for tighter boundaries around wagering-linked event contracts alongside broader ethics requirements—underscores that CLARITY is not only about regulatory authority for digital assets. Kennedy’s remarks at the hearing framed the bill as potentially relevant to prediction markets as a category, particularly in relation to customer protections and market integrity.
For traders, platform operators, and state regulators, the immediate watch item is the CLARITY Act’s released text and how it addresses the core jurisdiction conflict: whether it expands and clarifies federal oversight for event contracts, and whether it limits or displaces state enforcement where prediction markets intersect with sports wagering. Until the bill language is published, the questions raised in court and in Congress—about who regulates, who enforces, and how resources match the scale of these markets—are likely to keep escalating.
This article was originally published as Lawyer Says CLARITY Act Could Enable CFTC Oversight of Prediction Markets on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Russia’s State Duma has completed the final readings that bring the country’s long-awaited crypto regulatory bill one step closer to becoming law, approving draft legislation that would create a comprehensive framework for digital assets and define how regulated intermediaries can operate.
According to official parliamentary records, lawmakers approved bill No. 1194918-8, titled “On Digital Currency and Digital Rights,” in its second and third readings on Tuesday. The measure is now set to move to Russia’s upper house, the Federation Council, and then to President Vladimir Putin for signature before it can take effect.
Key takeaways
The bill would establish rules for a regulated crypto market, including exchanges, brokers, asset managers, and custodians.
The Bank of Russia would be given wide authority to supervise the framework and decide which crypto assets can be offered via licensed intermediaries.
Crypto use for payments inside Russia would remain prohibited, while the bill allows digital assets to be used in foreign trade operations.
Non-qualified investors would face purchase and cross-border transfer limits, with higher thresholds for qualified investors.
If enacted, most provisions would begin on Sept. 1, 2026, with a compliance transition period lasting until July 1, 2027.
Bank of Russia oversight takes center stage
A central feature of the proposed framework is the role assigned to the Bank of Russia. Under the bill, the central bank would oversee the regulated market, including the power to determine which crypto assets are eligible to be offered through licensed intermediaries and to publish implementing regulations.
The bill also lays out five categories of participants that would operate within the new rules: crypto exchanges, brokers, asset managers, custodians, and exchange service providers. By defining who can buy, sell, hold, and exchange crypto assets, lawmakers aim to formalize the market structure and reduce reliance on informal or unlicensed activity.
For investors, the bill differentiates between “qualified” and “non-qualified” participants. Non-qualified investors would be subject to an annual ceiling of 300,000 rubles (about $3,800) on purchases made through a single intermediary, and a 100,000-ruble annual limit on transfers abroad. Qualified investors would have annual purchase limits of 3 million rubles and annual cross-border transfer limits of 1 million rubles.
Payments at home remain blocked, cross-border use allowed
While the bill expands the legal perimeter around crypto markets, it also preserves a key restriction: it would continue to ban the use of crypto assets to pay for goods and services within Russia.
At the same time, lawmakers chose to make room for digital assets in international commerce. The legislation would allow crypto assets to be used in foreign trade operations, aligning with Russia’s broader push to facilitate cross-border settlement alternatives outside conventional payment rails.
Timeline: broad provisions from September 2026, transition through 2027
Most of the bill’s provisions are scheduled to take effect on Sept. 1, 2026, contingent on presidential approval. A transition period runs through July 1, 2027, designed to give market participants time to adapt to the new compliance requirements.
After the transition window closes, the bill indicates that crypto transactions would need to be executed through regulated organizations. It also states that banks would have to reject transactions that do not comply with the framework laid out in the law.
Russia’s legislative push does not stop at market rules. Lawmakers are also drafting related measures, including proposals on taxation and penalties for violations. A separate tax bill has already passed its first reading, while expectations are that penalty provisions would be considered before the transition period ends.
Industry activity appears to be moving alongside the policy work. Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted developments involving Russia’s banking sector, including Alfa-Bank testing crypto trading.
Legal framework is not the finish line
Even if the bill becomes law, implementation would still depend heavily on the regulatory follow-through and supporting infrastructure. Olga Goncharova, head of the Digital Financial Assets and Digital Currencies Expert Center at the Association of Russian Banks, told Cointelegraph that the measure creates a legal foundation but requires “extensive follow-up regulation” before the market can function smoothly.
“The law itself is only the beginning,” Goncharova said, adding that practical effectiveness depends on mechanisms that are still being developed by the banking community together with the Bank of Russia.
According to Goncharova, the central bank plans to issue around 80 additional regulatory acts by the end of the year. These would be intended to specify how the framework operates in practice, particularly around compliance expectations for institutions and market participants.
She also pointed to work on operational infrastructure needed for a regulated environment, including development of a domestic Travel Rule system, blockchain node infrastructure, and crypto analytics tools. These elements would be important for monitoring transactions, reporting, and ensuring that regulated intermediaries can meet the requirements that come with licensing and oversight.
The broader regulatory trajectory will also need to align with licensing and supervisory expectations for custody services. Earlier Cointelegraph reporting referenced that custodians face scrutiny even under the EU’s MiCA regime, underscoring that custody regulation is typically a key test case for any emerging framework.
With the State Duma’s approval now secured, the next critical moment is whether the Federation Council and President Vladimir Putin sign the bill. Investors and market participants should watch closely for the Bank of Russia’s forthcoming regulatory acts—especially details on asset eligibility, licensing requirements, and how banks will operationalize the transaction rejection rules once the transition period ends.
This article was originally published as Russia’s Parliament Passes Law Setting Rules for Crypto Market on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Ether (ETH) is back under fresh pressure from leveraged traders after a sharp push toward the $1,950 area. Tuesday’s uptick helped trigger around $62 million in liquidations tied to bearish positions, as ETH rose roughly 29% from its June 26 low near $1,500 and briefly tested $1,950 for the first time in about seven weeks.
The price move also mirrored a broader improvement in risk appetite. Bitcoin climbed above $66,500, while US equities strengthened after investors reassessed concerns about stretched valuations following the rapid rally in artificial intelligence-related shares.
Key takeaways
ETH’s breakout attempt near $1,950 came with meaningful leverage-driven liquidations, signaling traders were positioned for downside.
Ethereum’s fundamentals are not keeping pace: DApp revenues and weekly DEX volumes remain weak versus prior months.
Record staking participation (34% of ETH supply, per StakingRewards) may dampen sell pressure, but it hasn’t yet translated into stronger onchain demand.
Derivatives indicators are less bearish than late June, yet ETH perpetual funding has struggled to stay in the typical neutral band.
Next week’s catalysts from major US tech earnings could determine whether the market’s optimism extends to crypto.
Price rally meets uneven participation across Ethereum
Despite the renewed bullish momentum, Ethereum’s activity metrics suggest caution. The network’s onchain data points to a market that is moving more because of broader sentiment than because usage is clearly re-accelerating.
According to DefiLlama, weekly revenue generated by Ethereum decentralized applications (DApps) fell to $9.8 million—the lowest level since September 2024. That matters because DApp revenue is often seen as a proxy for real demand and user willingness to pay for services, while price strength alone can be driven by derivatives positioning and macro flows.
DefiLlama data also shows decentralized exchange (DEX) volumes sliding to about $7.2 billion per week. In that environment, traders appear to be less enthusiastic about the kinds of high-turnover assets that typically boost activity, including memecoins and certain utility tokens.
The revenue picture is similarly mixed among top applications. DefiLlama notes that some prominent projects have been under pressure on the year, with losses of 50% or more year-to-date reported for tokens including Ethena (ENA), Mantle (MNT), and Arbitrum (ARB). While individual performance doesn’t automatically determine Ethereum’s direction, broad weakness in major ecosystems can limit organic demand during upswings.
Derivatives coolness suggests traders aren’t fully convinced
ETH’s rally has been accompanied by shifts in derivatives sentiment, but not a decisive reset to confident positioning. Laevitas data indicates that the annualized funding rate on ETH perpetual futures has had trouble remaining consistently in a “neutral” 6%–12% range during the past month.
That is an important nuance: when funding stays near neutral, it often indicates more balanced long and short demand. When funding persistently drifts away from that zone, it can suggest one-sided positioning that raises the risk of reversals.
Still, sentiment has improved compared with late June, when funding rates turned negative and reflected stronger bearish demand. The improvement aligns with expectations that staking activity could help reduce downside exposure.
Staking hits a new participation record, but the market still wants catalysts
A key support factor for ETH’s structure has been staking. StakingRewards data shows that a record 34% of the total ETH supply is now staked, up from 33% just one month earlier. In practical terms, higher staking participation can reduce the amount of liquid ETH available for selling, which may lower immediate sell pressure during price rebounds.
The staking narrative is reinforced by continued institutional accumulation activity. The article’s source references Tom Lee’s Bitmine Immersion (BMNR US), which reportedly added 156,719 ETH over the past month, bringing its stake to 4.8% of available supply. Separately, earlier coverage from Cointelegraph highlighted Bitmine’s Ethereum staking generation, underscoring how large holders are positioning through staking rather than liquid trading.
Even so, staking participation alone may not be enough to sustain an upswing if onchain demand remains subdued. The same onchain picture that shows low DApp revenue and declining DEX volumes also helps explain why the derivatives market hasn’t fully “opened the throttle” for longs. In other words: the capital on the sidelines may be more willing to absorb downside than to chase upside.
ETH is also still far from its August 2025 all-time high—reported as 61% below that peak—which can weigh on risk appetite. Traders may remain reluctant to pile in until they see clearer evidence that activity and demand are broadening beyond a macro-driven bounce.
Earnings from US megacaps could influence whether ETH breaks higher
Ether’s ability to extend gains toward the next major psychological level—often framed as $2,100—likely depends on whether risk appetite stays elevated across both traditional markets and crypto. On Tuesday, the immediate backdrop was favorable: stock strength helped ease concerns tied to valuation worries after a fast-moving AI-driven rally.
Looking ahead, the market will be watching corporate results for cues on whether the “risk-on” trend can persist. The report points to 3M Company’s (MMM) earnings after Tuesday’s open as part of the early week catalyst calendar. More importantly for the crypto complex, it also highlights Alphabet’s earnings scheduled for Wednesday after US markets close.
Investors are reportedly focused on cloud services growth, with expectations cited as 64% growth in cloud revenue, amid heavy AI investment. If results and guidance reinforce a stable macro backdrop, it could help restore confidence across risk assets—potentially giving ETH the additional momentum it needs to test higher levels without relying primarily on liquidation-driven moves.
For traders and long-term observers alike, the next signals to watch are straightforward: whether ETH can hold above the recent breakout zone after the liquidation wave, whether DEX volumes and DApp revenue continue to stabilize instead of drifting lower, and whether derivatives funding moves back toward a more sustainably neutral range as macro catalysts land.
This article was originally published as Ether Surges Past $1.9K as Traders Eye $2.1K for ETH Breakout on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

A U.S. House hearing this week zeroed in on who should regulate sports-event prediction markets and what kind of customer protections regulators can realistically enforce as these platforms expand. Lawmakers and legal specialists discussed the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s (CFTC) role, the agency’s resourcing constraints, and the impact that pending U.S. crypto market-structure legislation—especially the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act—could have on oversight of prediction market companies.
During a Tuesday session titled “Examining Customer Protections and Market Integrity in Sports Event Prediction Markets,” Carl Kennedy, a partner at Katten Muchin Rosenman, said the CFTC may be “short-staffed” for both regulatory supervision and enforcement of prediction market platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket. Kennedy argued that the CLARITY Act could help by expanding the regulator’s authority to cover not only digital assets but also the “explosive growth of prediction markets.”
Key takeaways
A House Agriculture subcommittee hearing highlighted a perceived mismatch between the CFTC’s capacity and the rapid growth of sports prediction markets.
Experts pointed to the CLARITY Act as a potential vehicle to expand the CFTC’s jurisdiction over prediction markets alongside crypto assets.
The CFTC chair’s “exclusive jurisdiction” stance has intensified federal-versus-state regulatory conflict involving Kalshi and Polymarket.
Legislators expect the CLARITY Act’s bill text to be released soon, though details on prediction-market treatment have not yet been made public.
Why lawmakers are pushing on prediction market oversight
The hearing focused on how customer protections and market integrity should work in the specific context of sports event prediction markets. Kennedy’s intervention put a practical lens on the debate: even if the legal framework is clarified, enforcement still depends on agency resources.
He told the committee that the CFTC likely lacks enough staffing to fully address both regulation and enforcement for prediction market platforms. Kennedy’s argument linked this operational challenge to legislative timing—suggesting that any additional authorities from the CLARITY Act would need to come with the capacity to carry them out.
That point matters for market participants because prediction markets often rely on clear rules about how customer funds are handled, how conflicts are addressed, and how platforms maintain orderly trading. In a fast-moving sector, regulators typically face pressure to move quickly while also building the infrastructure to supervise new product types.
The CFTC’s jurisdiction claim and the state-federal clash
Part of the hearing’s urgency comes from ongoing legal and regulatory conflict. The CFTC chair, Michael Selig, has taken the position that the agency has “exclusive jurisdiction” over prediction market companies. Selig’s reasoning is that event contracts traded on these platforms are classified as “swaps,” placing them within the CFTC’s remit.
As Kennedy’s comments and related expert discussion underscored, this approach has fueled disputes with state authorities. Many Democratic senators have characterized the CFTC’s stance as an “assault” on states trying to regulate prediction markets. Several states have pursued legal action against Kalshi and Polymarket over sports-betting-like activity.
One flashpoint involved a Michigan court ruling that Kalshi said put it in an untenable position between state and federal directives. Earlier, reporting noted that Selig ordered Kalshi to ignore the Michigan court ruling—something the company described as creating a difficult compliance bind.
Legal experts quoted in earlier coverage have also suggested that these disputes could ultimately reach the U.S. Supreme Court. The underlying issue is structural: whether states can regulate prediction markets in parallel with the CFTC’s federal authority when the regulator views the contracts as swaps.
What the CLARITY Act could change—and what’s still unknown
In the hearing, attention turned to the CLARITY Act as the most immediate legislative lever on the horizon. Kennedy said the bill could grant the CFTC additional authority to address the “explosive growth” of prediction markets, implying that Congress may be willing to clarify—at least procedurally and jurisdictionally—how these products fit within the commodities regulatory framework.
However, the specific mechanics of how the CLARITY Act would treat prediction markets were not publicly detailed as of Tuesday. In reporting from the hearing session, Republican senators pushing for a vote before August state work periods said they expect to release the bill’s text soon, but no public details were provided on how the legislation would address prediction markets, ethics, or other concerns raised by legal experts.
One signal of the policy pressure surrounding the bill comes from earlier activity in Congress. In June, gambling industry groups petitioned the U.S. Senate to add language to CLARITY that would “explicitly prohibit” event contracts tied to sports and casino-style gaming. The White House has also been linked to ethics-related provisions in the package, with reporting stating the Trump administration “agreed to the most comprehensive and wide-ranging ethics provision in history” and worked to accommodate Democratic concerns.
Taken together, these threads show a tension that markets will watch closely: legislators appear to be trying to expand regulatory clarity for digital assets and related markets, while simultaneously debating whether prediction markets—particularly those resembling sports betting—should face stricter boundaries.
Why the timeline matters for platforms and customers
The sector’s near-term planning depends heavily on what Congress does next. If the CLARITY Act’s language expands the CFTC’s authority, it could potentially reduce some uncertainty for platforms—though it may also intensify legal battles with states if the legislation is interpreted as narrowing state power.
Just as importantly, the hearing made clear that authority alone may not solve the enforcement question. Kennedy’s “short-staffed” framing suggests the market could see continued compliance and supervision gaps even as legal frameworks evolve. For customers, those gaps can translate into uneven protections—especially during periods of rapid growth.
Readers should watch the release of the CLARITY Act text and closely track how it defines prediction markets, customer protection obligations, and the relationship between federal oversight and state regulation. The next legal steps—particularly any moves that could raise questions up the court system—may determine whether the regulatory tug-of-war ends or simply shifts into a new legislative framework.
This article was originally published as Clarity Act May Enable CFTC Oversight of Prediction Markets, Lawyer Says on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Movement Labs, the team behind the Movement Ethereum layer-2 network, has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the United States, according to court records. The filing places the company under court supervision as it restructures following a series of controversies around the launch of the MOVE token and subsequent corporate disruptions.
The petition was submitted on July 15 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware under Subchapter V, a streamlined reorganization route available to qualifying small businesses. If approved, Subchapter V can allow a business to continue operating while it works toward a plan for creditors.
Key takeaways
Movement Labs filed Chapter 11 under Subchapter V on July 15, with operations continuing during restructuring under court oversight.
The court approved interim measures including retention of bank accounts/cash management and permission to pursue debtor-in-possession financing.
Creditors have until Sept. 14 to submit claims related to the bankruptcy.
Move Industries CEO Torab Torabi says the bankruptcy is limited to Movement Labs, while Move Industries continues operating normally.
The move comes after months of fallout tied to MOVE’s launch, a market-making dispute, and exchange delistings that contributed to a major decline in token value.
Chapter 11 filing under Subchapter V
Court documents show that Movement Labs, Inc. sought Chapter 11 protection on July 15 using Subchapter V, which is designed to streamline reorganizations for certain small businesses. That status is significant for stakeholders because it can change the pace and structure of the restructuring process compared with a traditional Chapter 11 case.
Following the filing, the court granted interim requests that allow Movement Labs to maintain its bank accounts and cash management systems. The court also approved the company’s ability to obtain debtor-in-possession (DIP) financing, a common mechanism in Chapter 11 cases that helps fund operations while a debtor reorganizes.
For creditors and counterparties, timing matters. The court set a claims deadline of Sept. 14, giving parties a defined window to file claims tied to Movement Labs’ bankruptcy.
Move Industries says it is not covered
After the bankruptcy filing became public, Move Industries CEO Torab Torabi addressed the situation on X. According to Torabi’s statement, the Chapter 11 filing applies only to Movement Labs.
Torabi also said Move Industries—an entity that took over development and operations of the Movement ecosystem from Movement Labs in December 2025—continues to operate normally.
The distinction is important to users and developers because it suggests the broader ecosystem stewardship may not be directly suspended by Movement Labs’ restructuring. However, readers should still watch for how responsibilities, funding, and contractual relationships between the entities are handled during the bankruptcy process.
Earlier coverage from Movement’s community materials indicates the handoff occurred as part of a broader operational transition. Torabi’s post points to that separation as a reason investors should not automatically assume the entire Movement network is winding down.
Market-making controversy and exchange action preceded the filing
Movement Labs’ bankruptcy arrives after months of turmoil surrounding the MOVE token launch and a controversial market-making agreement. Cointelegraph previously reported that Movement Labs suspended co-founder Rushi Manche in May 2025 in connection with a deal he helped broker with Web3Port.
According to that earlier reporting, the market maker received 66 million MOVE—about 5% of the token’s supply—and later sold the holdings. The arrangement drew scrutiny after it reportedly exerted significant downward pressure on the token price, and an independent investigation was launched.
Cointelegraph also reported that Coinbase suspended MOVE trading later in May 2025 after determining the token no longer met its listing standards, with the market-making review ongoing at the time.
Those steps—suspension of a co-founder, ongoing investigation, and an exchange delisting—formed a damaging sequence that affected both market confidence and liquidity. A Chapter 11 filing typically signals that the financial and operational strain from such disruptions can no longer be contained internally.
Token collapse underscores the pressure on the project
The filing is occurring against a backdrop of a steep decline in MOVE’s market value. Cointelegraph’s source material notes that MOVE has fallen by more than 94% over the past year to roughly $0.01. While token price alone is not proof of bankruptcy, it often reflects a wider loss of trust, reduced trading activity, and potentially diminished revenue for token-linked business operations.
For market participants, the deeper implication is less about the immediate price reaction and more about what bankruptcy means for governance, funding, and stakeholder claims. In restructurings like this, creditors may seek repayment through settlement terms or equity arrangements depending on the company’s assets and liabilities—details that typically emerge gradually as the case proceeds.
What to watch next
Movement Labs’ restructuring plan and DIP financing terms will likely be the next decisive signals for investors and ecosystem participants. Readers should also monitor whether the separation from Move Industries remains operational in practice—especially around access to resources, continuity of development, and how any claims tied to past token-related controversies are handled.
This article was originally published as Movement Labs Seeks Chapter 11 After Months of MOVE Token Turmoil on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

The White House has reportedly reached an agreement on ethics language for the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act, a US crypto market-structure bill currently awaiting a possible Senate vote. The development is framed as a potential pathway to secure support from at least some Democratic lawmakers—an outcome that could prove decisive in a chamber where passage may require broad consensus.
According to a Tuesday report from Punchbowl, White House officials met with Republican Senators Cynthia Lummis and Bernie Moreno to align on the bill’s ethics provisions. Neither senator has publicly detailed the terms of the understanding, but the report suggested the outcome could also influence how US President Donald Trump’s crypto-related investments are viewed politically.
Key takeaways
The White House is reportedly working to finalize ethics language in the CLARITY Act after meetings with Sen. Cynthia Lummis and Sen. Bernie Moreno.
Support from some Democrats would matter because the Senate is expected to face a tight decision and likely needs 60 votes for passage.
Many Democrats have previously indicated that CLARITY would be “worthless” without ethics provisions addressing conflicts they associate with Trump’s connections to the crypto industry.
While the House passed CLARITY in July 2025, delays tied to shutdowns and unresolved policy questions have kept the Senate process uncertain.
Why ethics language has become the gatekeeper
The CLARITY Act has been positioned as a major effort to establish market-structure rules for crypto in the United States. The House passed the bill in July 2025 as part of Republicans’ “Crypto Week” agenda, but its Senate timeline has been complicated by multiple delays. The reported sticking points have ranged from lawmakers’ concerns over ethics to questions around tokenization and stablecoin-related rewards, alongside calls to protect developers from potential enforcement actions.
The central political friction in the Senate appears to be ethics and conflict-of-interest concerns, particularly as they relate to the Trump administration. Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted that Trump urged the Senate to pass CLARITY “in honor of” the late Senator Lindsey Graham, who the president said was a major supporter of the bill.
Still, several Senate Democrats have been explicit that they will not treat the legislation as complete without additional safeguards. According to Cointelegraph reporting, Senators including Elizabeth Warren, Chris Murphy, Jeff Merkley, and Chris Van Hollen said that any CLARITY bill would be “worthless” without ethics provisions addressing potential conflicts they believe stem from Trump’s ties to the crypto industry, including his memecoin and the family’s World Liberty Financial business.
Unclear vote math as Senate calendar remains unsettled
Even with a reported ethics agreement, it is not yet clear whether CLARITY can secure the 60-vote threshold that typically applies to overcome Senate procedural hurdles. The bill’s prospects hinge on whether enough lawmakers—especially among Democrats—are persuaded that the ethics provisions adequately address their concerns.
As of Tuesday, the congressional calendar reportedly did not show a CLARITY vote, and the bill text had not been made public. That lack of transparency can further complicate support: lawmakers frequently need full access to the exact language before they can credibly assess whether amendments actually address the specific ethics risks they have raised.
Cointelegraph also reported that it requested details of the agreement from Lummis’ office but did not receive an immediate response, underscoring that the negotiation’s specifics remain largely undisclosed to the public.
Administration message: “comprehensive” ethics provisions
While the details of the reported deal have not been released, a White House official told Cointelegraph that the administration is committed to advancing CLARITY and said it had agreed to “the most comprehensive and wide-ranging ethics provision in history.” The official also characterized the process as highly responsive to Democratic concerns, saying the administration had “bent over backward to accommodate [Democrats’] concerns.”
At the same time, opposition has not disappeared. Many Democrats have argued that hearings are necessary to examine Trump’s crypto investments and related connections before any vote. Those calls reflect a broader concern: even if language is improved, lawmakers may still want a formal record and additional scrutiny through hearings to determine whether conflicts persist.
Coinbase vice chair Ryan VanGrack, cited in Cointelegraph reporting, suggested that Democrats have already been able to negotiate customer protection provisions into the Senate version of the bill. However, that progress on one policy area does not appear to have resolved the ethics debate, which remains a key driver of uncertainty.
Crypto market reaction tracks the political development
Bitcoin moved higher during the news cycle, climbing above $66,000 early on Tuesday and reaching a seven-week high, according to Cointelegraph’s coverage. Traders linked the move to reports of an ethics deal and to separate developments involving Trump’s plans to introduce additional 10% international trade tariffs.
In social media commentary, Michaël van de Poppe, founder and chief investment officer of MN Fund and MN Capital, attributed the rally to expectations surrounding potential approval of the CLARITY Act. The observation highlights how tightly some market participants are tying near-term price action to US regulatory and legislative progress, particularly when bills are framed as shaping how crypto markets will operate.
What to watch next
Investors and builders should focus on whether the Senate bill’s text becomes publicly available and whether lawmakers’ concerns—especially around ethics—are reflected in verifiable drafting. The next inflection point is not just whether CLARITY advances procedurally, but whether enough senators are willing to commit before any final vote amid ongoing questions about conflicts and the adequacy of proposed safeguards.
This article was originally published as White House Signs Off on Ethics Rules in Market Structure Bill on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin and the broader crypto complex staged a rebound on Tuesday as optimism around proposed US legislation helped lift risk sentiment, while some analysts argued that cooling momentum in AI-linked equities could redirect investor attention toward digital assets.
Price action reflected that shift: Bitcoin briefly traded above $67,000, and Ether neared $1,950. Crypto-related stocks also surged, with Coinbase shares up about 12%, American Bitcoin rising roughly 14%, and Cipher Digital gaining around 17%.
Key takeaways
Regulatory clarity expectations in the US boosted crypto sentiment, with Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent signaling lawmakers are close to action on the CLARITY Act.
Bitcoin outperformed in the same session crypto equities rallied, suggesting the move was broad rather than isolated to spot trading.
Analysts cited a potential rotation away from AI-linked equities as AI trade momentum cools.
The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index’s pullback may be a signal that AI infrastructure enthusiasm is losing traction.
US legislative momentum lifts crypto risk appetite
The immediate catalyst for Tuesday’s turnaround was renewed confidence that US lawmakers could move forward on a long-debated framework for digital-asset regulation.
According to Bloomberg, US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said lawmakers were at the “1-yard line” regarding the CLARITY Act, a proposal intended to define the regulatory roles of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) across digital assets.
That kind of legislative direction matters to crypto markets because it can reduce uncertainty about how tokens are classified, which agencies have oversight, and what rules exchanges and custodians must follow. In the near term, even statements that suggest progress can improve investor confidence and translate into higher demand for crypto exposure—whether through spot or through equities that track the sector.
The stock reaction was pronounced. Coinbase’s reported jump of around 12% and similar gains in other crypto-linked companies indicated the market was responding to more than just token price moves; equities tied to the industry often react quickly to perceived regulatory and market-structure developments.
Rotation thesis: AI trade cooling could free up capital
Beyond regulation, some market commentators pointed to cross-asset rotation. As traders reassess the crowded “AI trade,” they may look for alternatives that previously attracted less speculative appetite.
FRNT Financial CEO Stephane Ouellette, speaking to Bloomberg, argued that with Bitcoin trading toward the top end of its recent range, the “path of least resistance” could be higher. He also suggested an “elevated likelihood” of a breakout as the AI trade slows and investors become more comfortable with the broader environment for interest rates.
This matters because the last year has seen AI narratives pull capital into specific equity segments, particularly chipmakers and AI infrastructure. If that momentum fades—whether due to valuation concerns, earnings expectations, or spending risk—capital can reallocate toward areas that offer a different risk/return profile, including crypto.
Semiconductors’ pullback signals AI momentum is weakening
The clearest supporting data for the rotation argument comes from the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index (SOX), described as a widely watched benchmark for chipmakers tied to the AI boom. According to the article, the SOX index surged roughly 110% over the past year, reflecting strong investor enthusiasm for AI-driven demand.
However, the same report highlighted that the rally has begun to stall. It notes that last week the SOX entered a technical bear market after dropping more than 20% from its recent high. Investors, it said, have grown more concerned about high valuations and the risk of overcapacity in AI infrastructure spending.
That development is important for crypto investors because AI-linked equity weakness can change market perception of speculative growth. When expectations around AI spending cool, speculative flows can loosen—making it easier for other themes, including digital assets, to attract new buyers.
It also reframes Tuesday’s move: rather than treating crypto strength as purely idiosyncratic, the market appears to be reacting to a broader shift in speculative leadership—from AI back toward regulated or macro-sensitive narratives like US policy progress.
What to watch next
Traders will likely watch whether CLARITY Act momentum translates into concrete legislative steps rather than rhetorical optimism, and whether AI-related equity weakness persists. If the semiconductor selloff continues and regulation expectations become more tangible, crypto may find follow-through beyond a single-session rebound—otherwise Tuesday’s rally could prove harder to sustain.
This article was originally published as AI-Driven Trading Slump May Spark Faster Crypto Market Breakout, Analyst Says on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin and the wider crypto market started Tuesday on a firmer footing as expectations for US regulatory progress reignited risk appetite, lifting both digital assets and shares tied to crypto activity.
Bitcoin briefly pushed above $67,000 and Ether neared $1,950, while crypto-related equities rose sharply. Coinbase stock climbed about 12%, American Bitcoin gained roughly 14%, and Cipher Digital jumped around 17%.
Key takeaways
Shares and tokens rallied after US Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said lawmakers are approaching a key vote on the CLARITY Act.
The proposed law would clarify which regulator—SEC or CFTC—oversees different categories of digital assets.
Analysts also cited weakening momentum in AI-linked equities as a potential driver of capital rotation back into crypto.
The Philadelphia Semiconductor Index’s pullback suggests speculation in AI infrastructure may be cooling after a strong run.
Regulatory optimism lifts the whole complex
The immediate catalyst for Tuesday’s rebound came from remarks by Scott Bessent, reported by Bloomberg, indicating that lawmakers were at the “1-yard line” on the long-debated CLARITY Act. The bill aims to define the regulatory roles of the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) for digital assets.
For investors, that kind of clarity matters because it can reduce uncertainty around enforcement risk and the classification of tokens and trading venues. It also has second-order effects: when regulators’ boundaries look more clearly drawn, capital formation—whether in exchanges, custody, or institutional products—tends to improve as participants better price compliance and operational costs.
Crypto’s rebound runs alongside stock strength
Market-wide optimism showed up most visibly in equities connected to the crypto ecosystem. Coinbase’s stock led gains among major crypto market proxies, while companies exposed to mining, trading, or related infrastructure also outperformed.
That strong correlation between crypto prices and crypto-linked equities often reflects a common driver: when policy expectations shift, both asset holders and equity investors adjust their assumptions about future regulation, adoption, and market structure.
Rotation risk: why AI-linked stocks may be losing steam
Beyond US legislative headlines, some analysts pointed to a separate potential driver—investors dialing back exposure to AI-linked equities—which could free up liquidity for other high-beta trades, including digital assets.
Bloomberg quoted FRNT Financial CEO Stephane Ouellette arguing that when Bitcoin is near the upper end of its range, the “path of least resistance” can turn upward. Ouellette also said the likelihood of a breakout may increase if the AI trade slows and investors become more comfortable with the broader interest-rate outlook.
The “AI trade” explanation has a concrete benchmark behind it. According to coverage cited by the article, the Philadelphia Semiconductor Index (SOX)—a widely watched measure for chipmakers tied to AI demand—surged roughly 110% over the past year. But momentum has started to slip: the SOX entered a technical bear market last week after falling more than 20% from its recent high, with investors reportedly increasingly worried about lofty valuations and the risk of overcapacity in AI infrastructure spending.
That matters because much of the speculative appetite in financial markets has been concentrated in AI during the last year. Since the public launch of ChatGPT in late 2022, the mix of rapid innovation, venture capital activity, and retail enthusiasm helped shift attention away from crypto and toward AI narratives across trading desks and risk budgets.
What to watch next
Tuesday’s bounce looks tied to two threads: near-term expectations for the CLARITY Act’s progress in Washington and signs that AI-linked equity momentum may be cooling. The next signal for traders and longer-term investors will be whether crypto price strength holds through subsequent US legislative developments—and whether the broader market continues to rotate attention from semiconductors back toward risk assets like digital currencies.
This article was originally published as AI-Driven Trading Slows, Analysts See Crypto Breakout Momentum on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Das XRP Ledger läuft mit seiner Version v3.2.0 jetzt auf 66 % der überwachten Validatoren, während sich das Netzwerk einer geplanten Änderungsaktivierung nähert. Das XRP Ledger v3.2.0 hat 99 Validatoren und 481 Knoten im überwachten Netzwerk erreicht. Die Aktivierung am 29. Juli bleibt wie geplant bestehen, da die Unterstützung durch Validatoren weiterhin über der erforderlichen Schwelle liegt.
Die Akzeptanz von Validatoren breitet sich über das gesamte Netzwerk aus
Das XRP Ledger v3.2.0 arbeitet derzeit mit 57,33 % der überwachten Knoten, wie aktuelle Daten des XRPL Explorers zeigen. Der Tracker hat 481 aktualisierte Knoten unter 825 beobachteten Systemen erfasst. Die Akzeptanz ist gestiegen, seit die Software im Juni verfügbar wurde.

Dollar-backed stablecoins are becoming a new channel for “digital dollarization” that BIS researchers say is largely resistant to capital controls—especially in emerging markets where households and businesses already face currency and access constraints.
In a study released by the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), researchers compared foreign-currency bank deposits with inflows into dollar-pegged stablecoins across more than 130 economies. They found that both measures tend to rise during macroeconomic stress, but stablecoin flows react far less to capital controls and other FX restrictions—an asymmetry the authors attribute to stablecoins circulating “partly outside the regulatory perimeter.”
Key takeaways
BIS research links both foreign-currency deposits and dollar-pegged stablecoin inflows to periods of macroeconomic stress.
Stablecoin inflows appear far less sensitive to capital controls than traditional foreign-currency deposits.
That resilience could limit policymakers’ ability to curb stablecoin adoption using tools designed for the banking system.
BIS reports limited evidence that deposit dollarization weakens monetary policy transmission, though higher foreign-currency deposits correlate with greater inflation risk.
The study suggests financial-stability regulation may need updating as tokenized assets expand beyond existing oversight structures.
Digital dollarization beyond traditional banking channels
BIS researchers frame stablecoins as potentially creating a parallel dollar-use ecosystem. Their analysis draws a comparison between two ways residents can move into foreign currency: by holding bank deposits denominated in foreign exchange and by holding dollar-pegged stablecoins.
According to the BIS study, both categories increase during periods of macroeconomic stress. That finding aligns with a common pattern in emerging-market finance: when local currencies weaken and uncertainty rises, demand for dollar assets often grows.
The important difference is how each channel responds to government attempts to restrict cross-border capital movement. The BIS team reports that stablecoin inflows show little reaction to capital controls or other FX restrictions, while foreign-currency deposits behave more like a traditional financial variable—tending to reflect policy measures more directly.
The authors argue this divergence is likely because stablecoins can circulate outside the regulatory perimeter. In practice, that means stablecoin adoption may not map neatly onto the same enforcement mechanisms used for bank deposits or conventional foreign-currency flows.
Why capital controls may be less effective with stablecoins
Capital controls and FX restrictions are designed to influence the movement of funds across borders and within domestic financial systems. BIS’s findings suggest that when a new, tokenized “dollar” route emerges, those tools can lose traction.
The study does not claim stablecoins are immune to every policy influence. Rather, it highlights reduced responsiveness in stablecoin flows relative to traditional foreign-currency deposits. For policymakers, that raises a practical question: how much of financial stability management still depends on the banking system being the main gateway for dollarization?
BIS also warns that stablecoins could undermine monetary sovereignty even if inflation dynamics remain similar in some cases. The concern is that households and businesses may shift into dollar exposure outside the banking system, particularly where local currencies are fragile or access to reliable financial services is limited.
Monetary policy transmission and inflation risk remain mixed
While the BIS study raises sovereignty questions, it also includes a more nuanced assessment of monetary policy effectiveness. The researchers report little evidence that dollarization via deposits weakens monetary policy transmission.
However, the study notes that countries with higher levels of foreign-currency deposits faced a somewhat greater risk of elevated inflation. That distinction matters because it suggests the impact of dollarization on macro outcomes may depend on structure and context—even if stablecoins and deposits are both dollar-linked.
For investors and risk managers, the takeaway is that “digital dollarization” may not automatically translate into immediate policy failure, but it can still complicate how central banks gauge demand for foreign-currency assets and anticipate pressure points in financial stability.
Regulators may need new tools for a tokenized financial system
BIS concludes that policymakers may need updated instruments to manage financial stability as stablecoin usage grows. The argument is not simply that stablecoins are “new,” but that existing regulations built for traditional banks and foreign-currency deposits may be less effective when the dollar exposure is tokenized and potentially distributed across channels that fall outside established compliance boundaries.
That becomes especially relevant as stablecoins are increasingly used for payments in emerging markets. In such settings, stablecoin adoption can be driven not only by speculative motives, but by operational realities—cross-border transfer speed, remittance costs, and persistent gaps in access to foreign exchange.
Stablecoin adoption is already spreading for payments and cross-border use
The BIS analysis arrives as other institutions document rising stablecoin use in the real economy. In a separate assessment focused on Nigeria, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) found that households and small businesses use US dollar-pegged stablecoins for cross-border payments, remittances, and access to dollar-denominated assets. The IMF attributed demand to factors such as inflation, currency depreciation, and limited access to foreign exchange.
In that IMF report, stablecoins were described as reducing the time and cost of moving money across borders while expanding access to financial services for users outside the traditional banking system. At the same time, the IMF warned that broader adoption of dollar-backed tokens could weaken monetary sovereignty by reducing demand for local currency and moving more financial activity outside conventional banking channels.
Beyond Africa, stablecoin payments have also accelerated in Latin America. Bitso Business, the enterprise payments arm of crypto exchange Bitso, reported an 81% year-over-year increase in stablecoin payment volume during the first half of 2026. The company also said that Circle’s USDC and Tether’s USDT made up 40% of all crypto purchases in the region in 2025, surpassing Bitcoin for the first time.
Separately, broader market data points to the scale of this shift. Stablecoin market capitalization has reportedly risen to about $309.7 billion, up from roughly $260 billion a year earlier, according to the figures cited in the original reporting and shown via DefiLlama’s stablecoin data.
For markets, the key question now is how policymakers will respond if stablecoin flows keep behaving differently than foreign-currency deposits. BIS’s evidence suggests traditional capital-control playbooks may be less effective, so the next watch items are regulatory measures that target tokenized dollar access directly—and whether stablecoin adoption continues to decouple from FX restrictions across more jurisdictions.
This article was originally published as BIS Warns Stablecoins Could Erode Capital Controls in Emerging Markets on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin extended its early gains into the Wall Street open, tracking a broader buoyancy in US risk assets despite fresh geopolitical and tariff-related headlines. TradingView data showed BTC/USD pressing toward $67,000 and edging close to its seven-week highs.
What stands out for traders is that neither the latest escalation in the US–Iran situation nor renewed talk of international trade tariffs has meaningfully derailed momentum in crypto markets. Instead, price action suggests participants are leaning toward the view that any disruptions may be temporary—at least for now.
Key takeaways
BTC moved toward $67,000 and threatened fresh multi-week highs as stocks held up into the US session.
Escalating tensions involving Iran and the Strait of Hormuz coincided with strength in risk assets rather than a selloff.
Reported US tariff plans could have been a headwind for speculative markets, but traders appeared to expect a resolution.
Analysts warn Bitcoin needs to reclaim its 21-week simple moving average to credibly challenge the broader bear-market structure.
Geopolitical escalation and tariff talk fail to cool risk appetite
According to TradingView, BTC/USD approached $67,000 during the session, with momentum that began earlier appearing to persist. The cryptocurrency’s relative resilience came alongside firm trading in US equity futures.
At the same time, the day’s headlines pointed to conditions that often support “risk-off” behavior. The US–Iran conflict saw further escalation after Iran struck targets at Amazon facilities in Bahrain in response to US strikes, and reporting indicated the Strait of Hormuz oil route remained closed.
In commodity markets, the geopolitical pressure showed up in crude prices: WTI oil rose to its highest level in over a month, nearing $85 per barrel, as TradingView’s WTI CFDs chart reflected.
On the policy front, multiple outlets reported that President Donald Trump is planning to introduce new 10% international trade tariffs. The proposal is described as following 50% measures imposed on Canada earlier in the week. Historically, tariff uncertainty can weigh on broader risk sentiment, yet crypto traders did not appear to react with sustained caution.
Instead, commentary from market participants suggested expectations that the situation would ultimately resolve in favor of markets. YouTube host Crypto Rover, for example, summarized the prevailing stance in an X post, writing that “Markets are pricing in peace.”
Stocks in focus as macro risks get tested
While crypto held up, some investors remained confident about near-term equity direction. Caleb Franzen, who runs macro analysis resource Cubic Analytics, posted on X that he had “zero fear” or worry regarding S&P 500 futures, describing the setup as supportive.
Still, the optimism was not universal. Cautionary notes surfaced from senior banking leadership, including JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon, who warned that markets were not pricing risks aggressively enough relative to what could come next. The juxtaposition highlights the tension investors face: risk assets can keep rising even when underlying risks are real, as long as participants believe outcomes will be less severe than feared.
Technical pressure point: the 21-week trendline
For Bitcoin-specific direction, attention shifted from short-term resistance levels to a longer moving-average benchmark. Material Indicators cofounder Keith Alan offered a more guarded view of the near-term outlook, arguing that the bear market may still be intact until BTC confirms a stronger trend.
Alan pointed to a “golden cross” involving the 21-day and 50-day simple moving averages on Monday, but emphasized that such signals on lower timeframes don’t necessarily negate a broader downturn. In his X analysis, he warned that bear markets do not always look like bear markets—especially when price action is volatile but not trend-confirmed.
The key condition, according to Alan, is whether Bitcoin can reclaim its 21-week simple moving average. He wrote that the macro trend would be challenged only if BTC pushes above that level, noting that until then, “the Bear Market remains intact.”
At the time of writing, the 21-week SMA was cited at $69,720, a figure that also aligns with Bitcoin’s 2021 all-time high. The larger implication is that reclaiming this long-term trendline would signal more than just a bounce—it would suggest a shift in how the market is pricing longer-duration risk.
Alan also acknowledged that there was “no real resistance” until $67,250, which helps explain why traders were willing to press higher even amid macro uncertainty. However, the absence of immediate resistance near $67,000 does not guarantee follow-through if the move fails at the longer-term moving-average level.
What to watch next for BTC
With BTC approaching the high-$60,000 zone, traders are now likely to monitor whether price can build momentum toward the $69,720 21-week SMA area. If Bitcoin cannot reclaim that threshold, analysts like Keith Alan suggest the market may still be operating under a bear-market structure—even if rallies continue to occur in the shorter term.
This article was originally published as Bitcoin Nears Seven-Week High as Equities Weigh Tariff Plans, Not Iran Risk on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Onchain-Kreditvergabe hat auf Base gerade eine neue Option erhalten: Morpho hat Morpho Midnight gestartet – einen Kreditmarkt mit festem Zinssatz und fester Laufzeit, der neben seiner bestehenden variabel verzinslichen Plattform Morpho Blue steht. Der Schritt führt ein intentbasiertes Modell ein, bei dem Kredite um konkurrierende Angebote herum strukturiert werden – statt nach einer durch das Protokoll festgelegten Nutzungskurve bepreist zu werden.
Laut einer Ankündigung, die Cointelegraph geteilt wurde, ist Midnight live auf dem Base-Mainnet und beginnt damit, cbBTC und USDC über mehrere Fälligkeitstermine hinweg zu unterstützen. Morpho sagt, die Einführung sei bewusst kontrolliert, um eine schrittweise Bereitstellung zu ermöglichen, die auf Sicherheit ausgerichtet ist.

Arcus, eine dezentrale Börse, die von Robinhood Crypto unterstützt wird, hat sein Onchain-Trading-Angebot auf der Robinhood Chain erweitert, indem es tokenisierte Aktien neben Perpetual-Futures auf den Markt gebracht hat. Die Entwicklung zeigt, wie schnell sich die DEX-Infrastruktur weiterentwickelt, um auch traditionelle Marktexponierung abzudecken – und nicht nur krypto-nativen Assets.
Laut einer Ankündigung, die Cointelegraph geteilt wurde, begann Arcus am Dienstag mit dem Handel von tokenisierten Wertpapieren und Perpetual-Kontrakten. Die Plattform hatte zuvor auch Spot-Märkte gestartet, als die Robinhood Chain am 1. Juli live ging – einschließlich des Zugangs zu Aktien-Token über ein selbstverwaltetes (self-custodial) Handelsmodell.

Gate Europe-CEO Giovanni Cunti sagt, dass die Verordnung über Märkte für Krypto-Assets (MiCA) die langfristige Betriebslast für Unternehmen erhöht habe, die bereits autorisiert sind, EU-Kunden zu bedienen. Er warnt, dass einige zugelassene Anbieter sich irgendwann dafür entscheiden könnten, die Compliance-Kosten nicht mehr tragen zu können.
In einem Gespräch mit Cointelegraphs „Chain Reaction“ am Montag argumentierte Cunti, dass MiCA strengere Anforderungen gestellt habe, was den Wettbewerb insbesondere für Neueinsteiger verschärft habe, und dass der Markt möglicherweise nun zu klein sei, damit manche Unternehmen die Ressourcen aufbringen können, die für den Betrieb im Rahmen des EU-Regelwerks erforderlich sind.

Bedenken hinsichtlich des sogenannten „De-bankings“ und des Zugangs zu Banken für den britischen Kryptosektor sind auf die parlamentarische Tagesordnung gerückt; eine neue Untersuchung soll prüfen, ob Krypto-Unternehmen und Verbraucher Hürden beim Zugang zu grundlegenden Finanzdienstleistungen gegenüberstehen.
Am Montag kündigte die Crypto and Digital Assets All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) an, sie werde untersuchen, wie Einschränkungen beim Kontozugang und bei krypto-bezogenen Transaktionen sich auf Investitionen, Wettbewerb und das breitere Wirtschaftswachstum auswirken können. Die Gruppe sagt, sie werde bewerten, ob etwaige Begrenzungen verhältnismäßig sind, und hat bis zum 31. Aug. schriftliche Einreichungsanfragen an Banken, Zahlungsdienstleister, Krypto-Unternehmen und weitere Interessenträger eröffnet, bevor sie ihre Ergebnisse und Empfehlungen veröffentlicht.

US-Spot-Bitcoin-ETFs verzeichneten ihren fünften Tag in Folge mit Zuflüssen – die längste Serie seit Mai –, nachdem die führende Kryptowährung die Marke von $66.000 überschritten hatte. Starke Zuflüsse deuten darauf hin, dass sich die Kursentwicklung und die Anlegerstimmung nach einer Phase anhaltender Abflüsse stabilisieren könnten.
Bitcoin (BTC) hat in den vergangenen sieben Tagen wieder an Dynamik gewonnen. Am Montag konnte die Kryptowährung $65.000 zurückerobern und am Dienstag ihre Gewinne ausbauen, um $66.000 zu übertreffen. BTC verzeichnete in den vergangenen 24 Stunden einen Anstieg von über 3% und wird derzeit bei rund $66.158 gehandelt.

Bitcoin ist am Dienstag über die bisherigen Höchststände eines Monats hinausgestiegen, hat die Marke von 65.000 US-Dollar durchbrochen und 66.000 US-Dollar erreicht – angetrieben durch eine Stärkung des kurzfristigen Aufwärtsmoments. Laut von TradingView zitierten Marktdaten erreichte BTC/USD auf Bitstamp ein Hoch von 66.306 US-Dollar – Werte, die zuletzt am 17. Juni zu sehen waren.
Die Bewegung scheint Händler anzuziehen, die zuvor eine Bestätigung über einen nahegelegenen Widerstandsbereich hinaus abgewartet hatten. Gleichzeitig deuten die Aktivitäten im Derivatehandel darauf hin, dass der jüngste Ausbruch inzwischen in Richtung von Liquidationen und höherer Beta-Positionierung überzugreifen beginnt, bevor das Ende des Monats Juli erreicht ist.