Crypto Breaking

Interstice Digital has launched a non-custodial cross-chain swap engine intended to move tokenized assets between the Canton institutional blockchain and major public networks, including Ethereum and Solana, with support for Robinhood Chain. The company says the system is designed so Interstice does not take custody of users’ funds and does not submit transactions on their behalf.
Instead, the announcement highlights FalconX, a digital asset prime brokerage for institutional clients, as the liquidity provider behind the engine. Interstice frames the integration as a way to connect Canton’s institutional tokenization activity with on-chain liquidity and trading access on public blockchains.
Key takeaways
Interstice’s cross-chain swap engine is described as non-custodial, with users retaining control rather than Interstice executing trades.
FalconX is positioned as the liquidity layer supporting swaps between Canton and public networks such as Ethereum and Solana.
Canton is built for regulated, institutional use, with privacy and permissioning controls aimed at compliant tokenized settlement.
The launch does not specify which assets are supported initially or provide usage or transaction-volume figures.
A non-custodial route between Canton and public liquidity
According to Interstice’s Tuesday announcement, the swap engine is intended to enable asset transfers across four networks: Canton, Ethereum, Solana, and Robinhood Chain. The core promise is operational: swaps can be performed without Interstice taking custody of assets or acting as the direct transaction executor for users.
For institutions and tokenization platforms, that distinction matters because custody and execution control can shape risk management requirements, compliance reviews, and operational workflows. While the announcement confirms Interstice’s role is limited to providing the infrastructure, it does not disclose further implementation details such as the exact mechanism by which routing and execution occur or which asset types are immediately supported.
FalconX’s involvement is central to Interstice’s approach. The prime brokerage is described as providing liquidity for the engine, with the stated aim of giving users a path between tokenized assets on Canton and liquidity available on public chains. In practice, this kind of integration can reduce friction for moving exposure between an institutional settlement environment and the broader, liquid ecosystems of public blockchains—particularly where counterparties and market makers operate primarily outside permissioned networks.
Canton’s institutional positioning is expanding
Canton is a public blockchain built with institutional finance in mind, featuring privacy and permissioning controls for regulated transactions and tokenized assets. Interstice’s announcement connects the swap engine to this broader Canton narrative: bringing more access to tokenized assets and settlement while enabling interaction with the trading activity of public chains.
The ecosystem has already attracted traditional financial institutions. The article notes that Canton’s partners include major banks and market participants such as JPMorgan, Goldman Sachs, and BNP Paribas.
Interstice’s integration arrives alongside additional signals that institutional tokenization activity on Canton is accelerating. In July, electronic trading platform Tradeweb executed an onchain US Treasury trade on Canton, according to earlier coverage. The described transaction involved Franklin Templeton transferring a tokenized Treasury security to Virtu Financial in exchange for tokenized cash. Tradeweb said it was the first real-time purchase and sale of a tokenized US Treasury settled against USDCx—a USDC-backed stablecoin issued on Canton—with other participants including Societe Generale, Digital Asset, and Blockdaemon. Tradeweb’s role was execution and price discovery, while Canton synchronized settlement between the two tokenized assets in real time.
Additional deployments mentioned in the coverage include Societe Generale’s euro- and dollar-denominated stablecoins on Canton for tokenized collateral, repo financing, and institutional settlement. Separate reporting also indicates Visa has tested private stablecoin settlement on the network, and other efforts include a Japanese government bond collateral pilot involving Mizuho and Nomura, along with S&P Dow Jones Indices placing its iBoxx US Treasuries Index on Canton.
Why the swap engine matters for tokenized markets
Cross-chain capability is increasingly important to institutional tokenization because value often needs to move between different environments—permissioned settlement rails on one side and public-chain trading venues on the other. Interstice’s swap engine is designed specifically to address that gap by providing a “route” between Canton tokenized assets and liquidity on chains like Ethereum and Solana.
The announcement’s non-custodial framing also reflects a practical concern for regulated users: who controls assets during exchange. Even when cross-chain tools are technically capable, the operational control model can be a deal-breaker for institutions that must satisfy internal risk committees. By stating that Interstice does not hold custody and does not execute transactions on users’ behalf, the company is signaling a reduced intermediary role compared with custodial bridge designs.
Still, readers should note what remains missing from the public description. Interstice did not disclose which assets are supported at launch, and it did not provide transaction volume figures. Those details can heavily influence how quickly liquidity fragments or how the system behaves under real market conditions, especially if initial support is limited to a small set of tokenized instruments or stablecoins.
Another factor to watch is how liquidity provided through FalconX translates into effective pricing and routing across chains. While the announcement confirms FalconX is supplying liquidity, it does not specify whether the liquidity model is tied to specific market makers, whether swaps are routed through particular venues on public networks, or how spreads may vary depending on supported pairs.
What to watch next
The next checkpoints are likely to be practical rather than theoretical: which assets Interstice supports first on the engine, how users integrate it into existing Canton workflows, and whether the system expands institutional tokenization’s reach into public-chain liquidity without introducing new operational complexity. For now, the launch adds another infrastructure layer to Canton’s institutional ecosystem—but the market will want clarity on real-world usage and supported token coverage.
This article was originally published as FalconX Integrates Interstice to Connect Canton to Ethereum, Solana on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

A crypto-focused political spending wave is targeting Florida’s 24th congressional district primary, with a PAC affiliate of Fairshake investing more than $2 million in ads attacking Democratic frontrunner Oliver Gilbert. The development underscores how digital-asset policy is increasingly intertwined with mainstream political races ahead of key votes in Congress.
According to Federal Election Commission (FEC) records filed as of Tuesday, Protect Progress PAC—an affiliate linked to the political action committee Fairshake and funded primarily by Coinbase and Ripple Labs—has spent more than $2 million on media opposing Gilbert in Florida’s 24th district. The record also highlights that, before the PAC’s ads were released, none of the candidates in the Democratic primary appeared to have taken a prominent public stance on digital assets within their campaigns.
Key takeaways
FEC filings show Protect Progress PAC spent over $2 million on ads opposing Democratic primary candidate Oliver Gilbert in Florida’s 24th district.
The PAC is affiliated with Fairshake, which has been funded primarily by Coinbase and Ripple Labs.
Oliver Gilbert’s campaign has faced accusations that the ads are designed to influence the primary rather than debate digital-asset policy substantively.
Protect Progress and Fairshake-affiliated groups are also spending across multiple races, including additional Florida contests.
Congressional legislative momentum for digital-asset bills like the CLARITY Act remains an external pressure point as lawmakers return from recess.
How Protect Progress entered the Florida primary
Protect Progress PAC’s spending in Florida’s 24th district comes as the seat currently held by Representative Frederica Wilson becomes a focal point. Wilson endorsed Oliver Gilbert at a June 22 event, according to reporting referenced by Cointelegraph.
Wilson’s congressional record on digital assets has drawn attention. She voted against the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act and the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act while serving in Congress—positions that align with the broader legislative agenda championed by crypto industry advocates.
In the Democratic primary race, State Senator Shevrin Jones—who had been ahead of Gilbert in an early August poll, as noted by Florida Politics—completed a questionnaire with the advocacy organization Stand With Crypto. That submission earned him a “strongly supports” rating from the group, per information on Stand With Crypto’s politician page.
The Protect Progress ads reportedly framed Gilbert’s candidacy in terms of digital-asset politics, with Gilbert accusing the operation of being driven by wealthy allies of former President Donald Trump. The ads included fake Miami Herald-style headlines that were not tied to specific digital-asset policy positions, according to reporting referenced in the article.
Fairshake affiliates expand spending beyond one race
Protect Progress is only part of a larger network of activity connected to Fairshake and its related political committees. The article notes that Fairshake reported a $193 million war chest as of January, and it has deployed funds through affiliates to support both Democratic and Republican candidates for the 2026 midterm elections.
Cointelegraph reported that, as of June, the PACs had already poured more than $82 million into primaries and special elections to influence voters through advertising. That level of spending indicates that digital-asset political outreach has moved beyond a single targeted campaign, with resources being deployed across multiple competitive contests.
Protect Progress also put additional money into Florida’s 23rd district. The PAC spent more than $150,000 on media supporting the re-election of Lois Frankel, according to the same reporting context. Meanwhile, Defend American Jobs—another Fairshake-affiliated committee—reported a combined $1.5 million on ads backing candidates in Alaska, Florida, and Wyoming.
Those races include support for Representative Nick Begich in Alaska’s at-large district, Republican candidate Sydney Gruters in Florida’s 16th district, and Representative Harriet Hageman for one of the US Senate seats representing Wyoming, as described in the article.
Why these ads matter to crypto investors and policy watchers
Even when campaign spending appears localized, its implications often extend to broader regulatory outcomes. Digital-asset policy in the US has frequently advanced through legislative bargaining, where the credibility of candidates on specific bills can influence committee dynamics and future priorities after elections.
The mention of CLARITY and GENIUS is important because it frames the ads as more than generic political marketing. CLARITY and GENIUS are positioned in the article as central legislative efforts affecting how digital assets could be regulated and how stablecoins might be treated under US law. For investors and developers, the practical question is not just who wins, but who is likely to support or oppose the next wave of digital-asset legislation once Congress moves again.
FEC filings also suggest an asymmetry that political observers may find meaningful: if none of the Democratic primary candidates had clearly established a strong digital-asset platform before the ads, the PAC’s messaging can effectively determine the issue salience for voters. That creates a strategic incentive for industry-aligned groups to influence primary outcomes early—particularly when general election dynamics are harder to predict.
What to watch next as lawmakers return
The immediate next milestone highlighted in the article is the legislative calendar. Both the US House and Senate are on recess until September, when the Senate is expected to hold a vote on the CLARITY Act. As that timeline approaches, the interaction between political spending and digital-asset voting becomes even more consequential.
Readers should watch how these Florida primary outcomes affect candidate momentum heading into November and whether further PAC spending narrows the policy debate to specific digital-asset bills—especially as Congress prepares to advance CLARITY and related measures.
This article was originally published as Ripple- and Coinbase-Backed PAC Spends $2M in Florida Elections on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Tokyo-listed corporate Bitcoin investor Metaplanet says it will expand its Bitcoin treasury playbook into the United States through a proposed controlling stake in Nasdaq-listed Super League Enterprise—an acquisition plan framed as a way to unlock additional capital channels for its existing strategy.
According to comments from Metaplanet CEO Simon Gerovich, the company plans to contribute 2,100 Bitcoin and $2.5 million in cash to Super League Enterprise. The target company is expected to be renamed Superplanet and positioned as Metaplanet’s US Bitcoin treasury platform. The transaction is expected to close in the fourth quarter of 2026, subject to customary closing conditions, including approval from Super League shareholders.
Key takeaways
Metaplanet plans to supply 2,100 BTC and $2.5 million to take control of Super League Enterprise, which would become Superplanet.
The BTC transfer would come from Metaplanet’s existing treasury, meaning it is not described as a fresh Bitcoin purchase.
Metaplanet says the structure creates two funding pathways: Superplanet could raise capital in US markets while Metaplanet continues fundraising in Japan.
Superplanet may also pursue US acquisitions in the Bitcoin treasury space that Metaplanet cannot access directly from Japan.
Super League’s shares jumped after the announcement, with trading activity surging sharply, according to Yahoo Finance data.
A US platform built from an existing Bitcoin war chest
Gerovich’s plan centers on converting a portion of Metaplanet’s current holdings into US corporate control. Metaplanet reportedly holds about 43,000 BTC, and the proposed 2,100 BTC contribution represents just under 5% of that balance. Based on the article’s cited valuation at current Bitcoin prices, the transferred BTC is worth roughly $135 million.
Importantly for investors watching treasury risk and capital efficiency, Metaplanet says the Bitcoin used in the deal would be sourced from its existing treasury. That detail matters because it distinguishes the transaction from a strategy that requires immediately buying more BTC—at least for the initial funding of the US platform.
The financing concept is also designed to be flexible. Gerovich indicated that the resulting group structure would allow both entities to contribute to the broader Bitcoin treasury agenda, with capital raised by either company potentially supporting further accumulation over time. Superplanet would operate as the US vehicle, while Metaplanet remains the Japan-listed parent.
What could change for corporate Bitcoin treasuries in practice
Metaplanet’s proposal is one more sign that corporate Bitcoin holders are rethinking how they manage fundraising and exposure across jurisdictions. The core pitch is diversification of access to capital: instead of relying solely on Japanese markets for additional funds, the group would have a US-listed outlet through Superplanet.
Gerovich also suggested Superplanet could pursue acquisitions in the US Bitcoin treasury sector that may not be available to Metaplanet directly. If those opportunities are real, the deal would not only relocate part of Metaplanet’s treasury influence into the US, but also potentially broaden the group’s deal pipeline—important in a market where the number of suitable targets can be limited by listing status, regulatory posture, and investor reach.
Still, the timetable is long and conditional. The closing window—expected in Q4 2026—means the plan faces two categories of uncertainty: (1) the outcome of Super League shareholder approvals and other closing conditions, and (2) how capital markets—and Bitcoin’s price and liquidity—may evolve between now and then.
Super League shares react sharply to the Bitcoin treasury signal
Markets responded quickly to the announcement. Super League Enterprise shares surged by more than 50% following the news, with trading activity expanding dramatically. The article cites Yahoo Finance data showing trading volume of roughly 37.3 million shares compared with about 393,000 shares beforehand—an increase of nearly 95 times.
While stock moves don’t confirm the underlying transaction’s completion, the reaction underscores how investors are reading this as more than a routine corporate deal. For a company whose current operations include immersive gaming, content, and advertising, the proposed pivot to a US Bitcoin treasury platform changes the narrative: from a gaming/content business to a structure where Bitcoin treasury management becomes central.
Metaplanet’s place among corporate Bitcoin holders
Metaplanet is described in the source as the third-largest corporate Bitcoin holder, trailing Twenty One Capital by roughly 500 BTC. Twenty One Capital is a publicly traded Bitcoin treasury company backed by Tether, Bitfinex, and SoftBank, and its formation was aimed at accumulating Bitcoin and increasing holdings on a per-share basis.
According to BitcoinTreasuries.NET, Metaplanet last added to its Bitcoin holdings in early July. That context helps frame the company’s current move: rather than only focusing on periodic purchases, it is now exploring a corporate structure that can potentially accelerate the ability to raise capital—without necessarily requiring immediate new BTC buying each time.
The article also highlights Strategy (linked to Michael Saylor) as the largest corporate Bitcoin holder, with more than 840,000 BTC. However, it notes that Strategy has also sold Bitcoin in recent months to fund dividends, share repurchases, and its US dollar reserve—an example of how publicly traded Bitcoin treasury companies may face balancing acts between maintaining BTC exposure and meeting corporate capital-management needs.
That tension is central to how investors should evaluate Metaplanet’s plan. The deal could strengthen the group’s capacity to raise capital and pursue acquisitions, but the ultimate impact will depend on how the combined entities handle future financing cycles, treasury drawdowns, and any need for fiat liquidity.
Investors should watch closely for progress toward shareholder approval at Super League Enterprise, any details that emerge about the final deal mechanics once terms are finalized, and—perhaps most importantly—how Superplanet intends to fund future Bitcoin treasury initiatives once it becomes operational.
This article was originally published as Metaplanet Boosts Bitcoin Treasury with 2,100 BTC Nasdaq Bet in US on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Metaplanet is expanding into the United States through a major Bitcoin-backed deal with Super League Enterprise. The Japanese company will contribute 2,100 BTC and $2.5 million in cash under the agreement. Meanwhile, Super League shares surged after the companies disclosed the planned transaction.
Metaplanet Takes Controlling Stake in Super League
Metaplanet will invest in its wholly owned U.S. subsidiary, Metaplanet Holdings. The transaction will give Metaplanet about 95.7% of Super League’s outstanding common shares. Super League will then adopt the Superplanet name and plans to trade under the ticker SUPA.
*Metaplanet to Invest 2,100 Bitcoin in Super League to Launch U.S. Bitcoin Treasury Platform, Superplanet* pic.twitter.com/wIR5eWkHJv
— Metaplanet Inc. (@Metaplanet) August 18, 2026
The agreement values the common shares issued to Metaplanet at $3 each. Metaplanet will also receive preferred shares and warrants as part of the transaction. Furthermore, the Japanese company will nominate five members to Superplanet’s nine-member board.
Super League’s existing operating business will remain active after the proposed transaction closes. However, Metaplanet will provide balance-sheet support and experience in raising capital through public markets. The shares received by Metaplanet will also remain subject to a five-year lockup period.
Superplanet Targets US Bitcoin Treasury Market
Superplanet will operate as a U.S.-based Bitcoin treasury company while retaining Super League’s current operations. The structure gives Metaplanet access to American capital markets alongside its existing fundraising operations in Japan. Therefore, both companies can pursue separate funding strategies while operating under a consolidated structure.
Metaplanet plans to use Superplanet to support further Bitcoin accumulation through U.S. financing channels. The strategy could include perpetual preferred shares, which can raise capital without issuing additional common stock. As a result, the structure aims to increase Bitcoin holdings per common share across both entities.
Metaplanet currently holds 43,000 BTC and ranks among the largest listed corporate Bitcoin holders globally. The company has also expanded its operations as Bitcoin became a central part of its treasury strategy. During the first half of 2026, revenue increased by 133.7%, while operating profit rose by 136.3% from the previous year.
SLE and Metaplanet Stocks Rise After Announcement
Super League Enterprise shares jumped more than 85% to $5.66 on Tuesday after the transaction became public. The sharp move reflected an immediate market response to the planned Bitcoin treasury transformation. Meanwhile, the proposed $3 transaction price remained below the stock’s post-announcement market level.
Metaplanet shares also gained 5.07% and closed at 228 Japanese yen during Tuesday trading. The stock moved between 224 yen and 238 yen during the session. However, trading activity remained below its average volume of about 22 million shares.
Bitcoin also traded above $64,000 as the companies announced their proposed transaction. The cryptocurrency traded between $63,532 and $64,515 over the past 24 hours. Meanwhile, Bitcoin trading volume increased 19%, reflecting stronger market activity during the session.
The transaction remains subject to customary closing requirements and approval from Super League stockholders. Both companies expect to complete the deal during the fourth quarter of 2026. Once completed, Superplanet will provide Metaplanet with a listed U.S. platform focused on expanding its Bitcoin treasury strategy.
This article was originally published as Metaplanet Expands Into the US With 2,100 BTC Super League Investment on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Prosecutors in the Southern District of New York (SDNY) are urging a federal judge to reject Alex Mashinsky’s bid to overturn his 12-year prison sentence tied to Celsius’s collapse. In a Friday filing, SDNY attorneys James McDonald and Allison Nichols argued that Mashinsky’s petition lacks legal substance and should be denied without additional proceedings.
The dispute centers on a motion Mashinsky filed after telling the court in May that he would proceed pro se—representing himself. His petition to vacate the conviction and sentence includes claims that point to matters involving cryptocurrency exchange FTX and his former colleague, Celsius chief revenue officer Roni Cohen-Pavon.
Key takeaways
SDNY prosecutors asked the court to deny Mashinsky’s motion to vacate, calling multiple arguments “without merit.”
The government criticized the petition for relying on allegations that were not supported by a sworn declaration.
Prosecutors disputed claims that Mashinsky received ineffective assistance of counsel.
Mashinsky is serving a May 2025 sentence of 144 months after pleading guilty to commodities and securities fraud.
Cohen-Pavon, who prosecutors described as providing “substantial assistance,” was sentenced to time served in May.
Prosecutors reject claims in Mashinsky’s petition
In their filing, prosecutors said Mashinsky failed to meet the threshold for relief. They argued that his motion is essentially a reprise of issues raised during sentencing, rather than a valid basis to undo the conviction or the punishment.
Prosecutors also pushed back on Mashinsky’s complaints about the performance of his legal team. While the filing indicates Mashinsky stops short of asserting factual innocence, it characterizes his approach as shifting blame to counsel for not pursuing certain arguments.
“Mashinsky has not even submitted a sworn declaration in support of these baseless allegations, and his petition should be denied without a hearing or further fact-finding,” prosecutors wrote, adding that the court should not revisit settled points based on unsworn claims.
What the court filing says about evidence and procedure
Mashinsky’s motion was filed after he announced he would take over his own representation. The government’s response suggests the petition’s evidentiary posture is a key weakness: prosecutors singled out the absence of a sworn declaration supporting the allegations.
That procedural detail matters because motions to vacate typically require more than generalized accusations; courts generally look for specific, substantiated grounds for relief. In the government’s view, Mashinsky’s filing did not meet that standard.
As of Tuesday, the judge overseeing the case had not issued a response to the government’s submission.
Background: Celsius collapse, guilty pleas, and sentencing
Mashinsky was sentenced in May 2025 to 144 months in prison after pleading guilty to commodities fraud and securities fraud connected to “manipulative and deceptive devices” at Celsius. The guilty plea followed a broader legal crackdown on Celsius after the platform filed for bankruptcy in 2022 amid a wider market downturn that began with the collapse of Terraform Labs.
Roni Cohen-Pavon—Celsius’s chief revenue officer—was also indicted in 2023 alongside Mashinsky and later pleaded guilty. According to prosecutors, Cohen-Pavon provided “substantial assistance” to the government’s case. In May, she was sentenced to time served.
At sentencing, Mashinsky was ordered to pay $48 million in forfeiture. He also agreed to pay $10 million as part of a separate settlement with the US Federal Trade Commission, alongside arrangements described as including a $47 billion judgment that was suspended.
Earlier coverage also noted related enforcement actions against Celsius leadership, including a separate FTC matter involving Celsius co-founders Leon Goldstein and another defendant, referenced in connection with the broader Celsius fallout.
Regulators still pursuing parallel cases
While the criminal case reached sentencing for Mashinsky and Cohen-Pavon, regulators continued to work through other legal tracks tied to Celsius leadership.
In June, the US Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) announced that Mashinsky was permanently banned from trading in markets under the CFTC’s authority. That action was described as among the last major resolutions tied to Mashinsky and Celsius following the 2022 collapse.
At the same time, a civil action by the US Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) involving a co-founder was reported as ongoing even after the criminal case moved forward and the court issued judgment against the platform. As of July 30, the SEC said its attorneys and Mashinsky were “engaged in settlement discussions.” The SEC requested 60 days to file a status report, effectively pushing the next checkpoint toward the end of September.
For investors and market participants, these parallel processes underline a recurring reality in crypto enforcement: criminal cases can conclude on a timetable that differs from regulatory litigation. Even when one front reaches a sentencing milestone, other matters—whether commodities, securities, or consumer-protection—can continue to shape compliance expectations and potential liability.
Readers should watch whether the SDNY judge grants or denies Mashinsky’s request to vacate, and whether the court allows any additional fact-finding or hearings. At the same time, settlement dynamics in the SEC civil matter—and any further regulatory steps following the CFTC’s permanent trading ban—remain key to understanding what outcomes could still materially affect Celsius-related defendants and those watching closely for precedent in crypto enforcement.
This article was originally published as U.S. Federal Prosecutors Reject Ex-Celsius CEO’s Motion to Vacate on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin climbed to around $65,000 after the Wall Street open, extending gains as broader risk sentiment stabilized despite renewed geopolitical concerns tied to the US and Iran. The move came alongside a rebound in US equities, where the S&P 500 bounced from its lowest level since early August.
While stocks were finding support, the bond market and oil developments signaled a more complicated macro backdrop. BTC’s latest push also revived chart-based debate over whether the market is genuinely transitioning from consolidation into a sustainable breakout.
Key takeaways
Bitcoin reached $65,000 for the first time since Aug. 10, following a rebound in the S&P 500.
US 30-year yields jumped to 5.34%, the highest since January 2007, highlighting inflation and borrowing concerns.
Trump’s Strait of Hormuz comments pushed geopolitical headlines back into focus, even as oil showed limited immediate volatility.
Technical traders are watching key levels tied to a head-and-shoulders “bottoming” argument around $62,300.
US equities bounce while Bitcoin tests new highs
According to TradingView data referenced in the report, BTC/USD continued building on the week’s gains as the S&P 500 recovered from a session low of 7,696, its lowest since Aug. 4. The divergence matters because it suggests Bitcoin’s momentum is not merely mirroring equity direction—at least in the near term.
The geopolitical narrative returned to the forefront after US President Donald Trump posted on Truth Social that the Strait of Hormuz oil route would be treated as “new US territory,” framing the area as “open.” His later message emphasized that there were “no talks or conversations” with Iran, while asserting that naval conditions remained active and that the strait was operating.
Both the US and Iran have long-standing claims connected to control and security in the Hormuz region. In earlier commentary carried in the coverage, Trump also referenced threats against US ally Oman related to Oman’s plans to work with Iran on charging shipping tolls. Despite these headlines, oil’s immediate reaction appeared muted in the same timeframe, with WTI crude reported down about 1% to roughly $84 per barrel as of the time of writing.
Bond yields send a warning signal for risk assets
Even with stocks rebounding, government bond pricing suggested investors were still demanding more compensation for macro uncertainty. The US 30-year yield reached 5.34%, the highest level since January 2007, according to the cited market updates.
BNY Mellon analyst Geoff Yu warned in a research note quoted by the New York Times that the rise reflected investors seeking higher yields to cover inflation risk, while also pointing to the impact of government borrowing. The practical takeaway for crypto traders is that steep yield moves can raise the discount rate for risk assets, sometimes tightening financial conditions just as equities attempt to stabilize.
For Bitcoin specifically, this backdrop can create a tug-of-war: crypto may benefit from renewed interest when risk appetite returns, yet it can struggle if rates continue to rise sharply or if liquidity conditions tighten.
Chart watch: head-and-shoulders “bottoming” debate
Beyond macro headlines, the latest price action has turned attention back to technical structure. Trader and analyst Aksel Kibar, writing to X followers and cited in the report, focused on a potential reverse head-and-shoulders formation and pointed to $62,300 as the culmination point where a rebound would need to originate to validate the pattern.
Kibar argued that if Bitcoin is going to reverse higher, the move needs to develop from that area. He also discussed downside and upside scenarios if the structure fails or if the rebound sustains, including a potential target of $53,000 in the event of breakdown, and an upside target around $76,000 if the recovery extends.
That structure-focused framing is important because $65,000 is not simply a “new high” in isolation—it’s part of a decision zone where market participants determine whether the breakout is real or whether price returns to the prior range.
Why $65,000 may not be the finish line
The coverage also highlighted that earlier resistance levels have been a recurring barrier. Cointelegraph previously reported that underwater investors were contributing to Bitcoin’s inability to push higher. In the current update, Bitcoin’s rebound to $64,500 was described as stopping short of an overhead trend line: the 50-month exponential moving average (EMA), now referenced as $65,827.
That level is likely to draw attention from traders because moving averages often act as a proxy for longer-term trend health. A failure to reclaim and hold above the 50-month EMA could signal that the market is still negotiating the same distribution between sellers and buyers—especially if bond yields remain elevated.
At the same time, the fact that Bitcoin pressed toward $65,000 as US stocks bounced suggests demand is present. The immediate question is whether buyers can convert that momentum into follow-through without a renewed risk-off shock from rates or geopolitics.
Going forward, readers should watch whether BTC can hold above the reclaimed zone around the recent breakout levels and whether the market’s behavior around the $65,827 50-month EMA becomes more decisive—particularly as long-end Treasury yields and Hormuz-related headlines continue to influence broader risk sentiment.
This article was originally published as Bitcoin Holds Near $65K as S&P 500 Rebounds After US-Iran Tensions on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

MoonPay has added Cash App Pay as a funding option for cryptocurrency purchases, enabling eligible customers in the United States to use their Cash App balances to buy crypto directly through MoonPay’s checkout. The move is intended to reduce friction by letting users complete transactions without switching between apps or performing an additional login.
In an announcement shared with Cointelegraph, MoonPay said Cash App Pay is available both on MoonPay’s own checkout and through select partner integrations. Those partners include Trust Wallet, Bitcoin.com, MetaMask, Moonshot, Ledger, BitPay, Uniswap, Tangem, LOBSTR and Edge.
Key takeaways
MoonPay’s integration allows eligible US users to fund crypto buys using Cash App balances via Cash App Pay.
Users can complete purchases through MoonPay checkout and partner wallets without switching apps or creating an extra login.
Cash App is already a direct on-platform Bitcoin buyer/seller; MoonPay’s integration expands the range of assets accessible through the Cash App-funded flow.
MoonPay is positioning itself as more than a fiat-to-crypto onramp, adding broader payment and infrastructure capabilities in 2026.
A tighter path from mainstream payments to crypto
Cash App, operated by Block, already lets users buy and sell Bitcoin inside the app. MoonPay’s new Cash App Pay option expands the practical reach of that user base by routing funding through Cash App balances into MoonPay’s crypto purchase experience, including access through multiple third-party platforms.
According to Block’s second-quarter shareholder report, Cash App reported 59 million active users in June. While that figure does not measure how many of those users will adopt Cash App Pay for non-Bitcoin crypto purchases, it highlights the scale of the audience MoonPay is trying to reach through a familiar consumer payments interface.
MoonPay co-founder and CEO Ivan Soto-Wright framed the integration around usability and trust, saying that Cash App is where “tens of millions of Americans” already manage their money and that the partnership allows those users to access a wider digital asset ecosystem funded “instantly” from an app they already know.
Available through MoonPay and multiple wallets
MoonPay said Cash App Pay can be used through its own checkout experience and with select partners, including widely used consumer wallets and on-platform payment interfaces such as MetaMask, Trust Wallet, Uniswap and BitPay. The company also named hardware and app-based ecosystems like Ledger and Tangem, as well as platforms including Edge and Bitcoin.com.
For users, the practical difference is the ability to fund a crypto purchase using Cash App’s balance while staying within the same general transaction flow—rather than jumping to a separate app to complete funding, then returning to finish a purchase elsewhere.
MoonPay also noted that Cash App Pay joins its existing payment integrations, which already include PayPal and Venmo. PayPal was added in 2024, and MoonPay later expanded support to Venmo.
Regulatory footing and MoonPay’s broader build-out
MoonPay’s announcement also comes as the company continues shifting from a straightforward onramp model toward a wider set of crypto services and infrastructure. From a compliance standpoint, MoonPay said it is licensed by the New York State Department of Financial Services via a BitLicense and Limited Purpose Trust Charter, and is authorized under the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation in the Netherlands.
That regulatory posture matters because payment integrations typically require clear jurisdictional control—especially when partnering with mainstream consumer finance apps and embedding checkout or funding options across different platforms.
MoonPay has also been active on the acquisition and product-expansion front in 2026. It acquired Solana trading infrastructure provider DFlow in May, after an April deal for crypto security firm Sodot as part of a broader push into institutional services. In July, MoonPay acquired cross-chain infrastructure startup Glide and launched PayBox, a vault intended to let ChatGPT and Claude users authorize crypto transactions while keeping custody of their assets.
Taken together, the Cash App Pay integration fits into a wider theme: MoonPay is working to make crypto buying more accessible through familiar consumer payments while simultaneously building capabilities that extend beyond simple fiat-to-crypto transfers.
What to watch next
For users, the key question is rollout: which US customers are eligible for Cash App Pay inside MoonPay’s checkout and partner integrations, and whether the offering expands to more partners over time. For the market, investors and builders will likely watch whether “mainstream payments as crypto rails” continues to spread beyond Bitcoin-focused in-app buying, turning payments apps into broader gateways for multiple crypto assets.
This article was originally published as MoonPay Integrates Cash App Pay to Enable US Crypto Purchases on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

MoonPay has added Cash App Pay to its checkout, giving eligible US customers a way to purchase cryptocurrency using funds from their Cash App balance. The payments provider says the option is available both on MoonPay’s own platform and through select partner integrations, removing the need to move between apps or complete additional logins.
In an announcement shared with Cointelegraph on Tuesday, MoonPay said Cash App Pay is now live for users across its network of wallet and payments partners, including Trust Wallet, Bitcoin.com, MetaMask, Moonshot, Ledger, BitPay, Uniswap, Tangem, LOBSTR, and Edge.
Key takeaways
MoonPay’s checkout now supports Cash App Pay, allowing US users to fund crypto purchases directly from their Cash App balance.
The integration is also available through select MoonPay partners, including major wallet and onchain platforms such as MetaMask and Uniswap.
MoonPay’s payments stack already includes integrations with PayPal and Venmo, after adding PayPal in 2024 and expanding to Venmo later.
Cash App, operated by Block, supports buying and selling Bitcoin in-app—MoonPay’s integration broadens the range of crypto options available to users who prefer Cash App funding.
The company is licensed in New York and authorized in the Netherlands under EU crypto rules, reflecting its ongoing push to expand beyond traditional onramps.
A simpler path from Cash App funds to crypto
For users, the practical change is convenience. MoonPay says customers can buy cryptocurrency by using their Cash App balance through MoonPay’s checkout flow, without switching apps or completing a separate login. The goal is to reduce friction at the moment money changes hands—an area where crypto purchases have often struggled against the “just don’t make me do it twice” expectations of mainstream payment users.
Cash App already offers in-app Bitcoin buying and selling, which helped make it a familiar onramp for millions of people. MoonPay’s integration extends that funding method beyond Bitcoin, potentially making it easier for Cash App users to access a wider selection of assets via partner wallets and platforms.
Block’s shareholder reporting indicates Cash App had 59 million active users in June, according to its second-quarter shareholder letter linked by Cointelegraph. As MoonPay plugs into that user base through Cash App Pay, the integration could improve discovery and conversion for assets accessible through its supported partners.
Available across MoonPay’s checkout and partner ecosystem
MoonPay positioned the rollout as part of its broader distribution strategy—pushing payment options not only through its own interface, but also through third-party applications. In Tuesday’s announcement, the company named a range of partners where Cash App Pay is supported, spanning self-custody wallets, crypto services, and payment/commerce tools.
These include wallets and ecosystems such as Trust Wallet, MetaMask, Ledger, Tangem, and Bitcoin.com, as well as platforms like Uniswap and BitPay. For users, that matters because it means they may not need to choose between a wallet they already use and a payment provider they trust; instead, the funding method can travel with the interface.
MoonPay’s payments expansion: PayPal, Venmo, and now Cash App Pay
The Cash App Pay addition continues MoonPay’s ongoing effort to broaden the range of mainstream payment routes it can offer. Cointelegraph notes that MoonPay supports payment integrations with PayPal and Venmo as well—PayPal was added in 2024, and MoonPay later expanded to Venmo.
By stacking familiar consumer payment brands on top of its crypto checkout infrastructure, MoonPay is effectively targeting a recurring user need: the ability to fund crypto purchases through everyday financial accounts. Cash App Pay is a particularly notable fit because Cash App is already designed around balance management inside a single app, which may reduce friction for users who don’t want to learn a new payment flow.
Regulatory footing and a shift beyond simple onramps
MoonPay said its operations are backed by licensing and authorization frameworks. The company is licensed by the New York State Department of Financial Services through a BitLicense and Limited Purpose Trust Charter, and it is authorized under the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA) in the Netherlands.
The integration also arrives during a period when MoonPay has been broadening its focus beyond a pure “fiat-to-crypto onramp.” Cointelegraph reported that the company has pursued multiple acquisitions and product moves during 2026.
Earlier in the year, MoonPay acquired Solana trading infrastructure provider DFlow in May, following an April deal for crypto security firm Sodot. In July, MoonPay acquired cross-chain infrastructure startup Glide and launched PayBox, described in prior Cointelegraph coverage as a vault designed to let ChatGPT and Claude users authorize crypto transactions while keeping custody of their assets.
While Cash App Pay is still fundamentally about payments, MoonPay’s larger pattern suggests it is building a wider platform that can support not just entry into crypto markets, but also execution and infrastructure for services that operate across chains and applications.
What to watch next
As Cash App Pay rolls out through MoonPay and partner apps, users and builders should watch for which cryptocurrencies become available through each partner interface and whether MoonPay continues expanding to additional mainstream payment rails. The broader question is whether these integrations translate into sustained conversion—turning “one more checkout option” into a reliable default for new crypto buyers.
This article was originally published as MoonPay Integrates Cash App Pay to Enable US Crypto Purchases on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

BitBox, the Swiss maker of self-custody hardware wallets, has released a firmware update to address two security issues it describes as “severe.” The company says the fixes reduce the risk of malicious firmware installation and prevent scenarios involving its Silent Payments feature that could cause Bitcoin to be locked to an unintended address.
BitBox reported that it has not received any information indicating either vulnerability has been exploited in the wild or that users have lost funds as a result. Still, the disclosure lands amid a broader run of hardware-wallet-related security concerns, including a Coldcard flaw that was later linked to losses exceeding $112 million, according to Galaxy Research.
Key takeaways
BitBox’s latest firmware update targets two vulnerabilities it labels “severe,” including a memory corruption issue that could allow arbitrary code execution in unconfigured wallet states.
The update also addresses a Silent Payments weakness that could enable Bitcoin to be locked to an unintended address, creating a potential ransom-type leverage scenario.
BitBox says it has seen no reports of exploitation or user fund loss tied to either issue.
The release arrives after high-profile incidents spanning hardware wallet devices and the services around them, including a Coldcard issue tied to large BTC theft totals.
What BitBox says the firmware flaws could enable
In a security disclosure released on Monday, BitBox said one of the vulnerabilities stems from memory corruption affecting “Multi editions of BitBox02 and BitBox02 Nova” when those devices have not been configured with a wallet.
BitBox explained that, under certain conditions, a malicious host could exploit the bug to execute arbitrary code and potentially install malicious firmware. If successful, that chain of events could expose user funds by altering how the device signs transactions or operates.
The second issue relates to BitBox’s Silent Payments implementation. BitBox said the vulnerability could allow a malicious host to lock Bitcoin to an unintended address. While the company stated that the flaw does not enable direct theft in the way some vulnerabilities do, it argued an attacker could still use the situation to demand a ransom in exchange for cooperation on recovering the coins.
Why the update matters for self-custody users
Hardware wallets are designed to minimize the amount of trust users must place in online systems. Even so, the BitBox disclosure highlights an important nuance: the device is not only responsible for protecting private keys, but also for maintaining a secure operating environment under all possible states—including those that occur before a wallet is configured.
For users, this is a practical reminder to keep firmware current, especially when device behavior can be influenced by connected hosts during setup or ongoing interactions. BitBox’s emphasis on “unconfigured” wallets suggests there is risk concentrated in specific device states rather than a universal exposure across all usage patterns. Still, the company’s decision to classify both bugs as severe indicates the potential outcomes are serious enough to warrant immediate action.
The timing: hardware-wallet incidents beyond device code
BitBox’s update arrives at a moment when the hardware wallet narrative has been dominated not only by device-level flaws, but also by problems in surrounding ecosystems—such as shipment and order-management systems.
Earlier, Cointelegraph reported on a Coldcard flaw that was traced to a March 2021 firmware change and reportedly remained undetected for more than five years. That vulnerability affected wallet-seed randomness. According to Galaxy Research, that defect enabled attackers to brute-force impacted wallet seeds and derive private keys without physical access. Galaxy Research said Coldcard-related losses exceeded $112 million, and reported approximately 1,778.6 BTC swept from more than 8,600 addresses.
More recently, separate data breaches involving Trezor and SafePal exposed customer and order information for more than 53,000 customers. Cointelegraph coverage noted that Trezor attributed exposure affecting 13,689 customers’ data to shipping provider ShipMonk. SafePal, meanwhile, said an authorization flaw in an order-tracking plug-in exposed details tied to 39,798 customers. In both cases, Cointelegraph reported that the incidents did not compromise device private keys or recovery phrases, but both companies warned the information could be used for targeted phishing and impersonation attempts.
These episodes underline a broader reality: self-custody security is shaped by a chain of components—device firmware, host-side software interactions, and operational services that handle customers and transactions. Even when devices themselves remain uncompromised, attackers may still exploit human and process-level weaknesses to increase the odds of successful fraud.
What investors and builders should watch next
BitBox says there are no reports of exploitation tied to either vulnerability, but the company’s disclosure nonetheless reinforces the need for disciplined update practices across the hardware wallet stack. The next signal to monitor is whether BitBox’s patch becomes the new baseline for Multi editions of BitBox02 and BitBox02 Nova users, and whether Silent Payments-related guidance triggers further clarification from the company about conditions under which users could be exposed.
For the industry, the broader question is how quickly manufacturers respond after audits or research uncover weaknesses—and how effectively they communicate practical mitigation steps to users who may not follow security advisories closely.
This article was originally published as BitBox Issues Urgent Fix for Severe Wallet Vulnerabilities on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Bitcoin’s rally above $64,000 on Monday was accompanied by a sharp spike in derivative-driven risk events, with short liquidations reaching their highest level in nearly a month. The move pushed BTC to around $64,550 on Bitstamp, according to market charting referenced by Crypto news coverage.
On-chain analytics firm CryptoQuant linked the upswing to crowded short positioning and uneven funding rates across major exchanges—conditions that can force shorts to close rapidly and accelerate upward price moves. Even so, CryptoQuant and related reporting emphasized that weaker spot demand remains a key limitation for how long the rebound can last, especially after a week of net ETF outflows.
Key takeaways
CryptoQuant attributes Monday’s jump toward $64,500 to a short squeeze fueled by illiquid market conditions and funding-rate imbalances.
Total Bitcoin short liquidations amounted to 637 BTC on Monday, the largest single-day figure since July 21, per CryptoQuant data.
Funding rates shifted downward over 24 hours (from roughly 0.006% to 0.003%), which CryptoQuant says could enable additional squeezes if short exposure grows.
Despite the rally, both CryptoQuant’s commentary and earlier market coverage point to limited spot demand and ongoing ETF outflows as potential constraints.
Short-term holders appear to be defending resistance, with their cost basis cited around $68,700, based on UTXO age metrics referenced in related analysis.
Short liquidations surge as funding rates reset
After a weekly close that helped set up the rebound, BTC climbed roughly 3% on Monday, topping out near $64,550 on Bitstamp, with prices previously hovering around $62,750. CryptoQuant’s analysis focused on what it described as a “low-volume liquidity trap,” where thin liquidity can magnify the impact of derivative positioning.
CryptoQuant reported that, around $62,750, funding-rate dynamics began to diverge between exchanges. It highlighted that shorts dominated on several major venues, including Binance, Bybit, OKX, and Deribit, while HTX saw a brief spike in funding rates to 0.05%. Funding rates represent periodic payments between long and short positions in Bitcoin derivatives markets; the direction of the aggregate rate indicates whether longs are generally paying shorts or vice versa.
In CryptoQuant’s framing, this setup created the primary catalyst for Monday’s move: a crowded short book that became vulnerable as price rose and forced traders to unwind positions. The result was a liquidation event—short positions were closed at market prices, helping drive BTC higher.
CryptoQuant data put total short liquidations at 637 BTC for Monday, described by the firm as the largest single-day total since July 21. That level of liquidations indicates that the rebound was not only a mild drift upward, but a fast repricing event concentrated in leveraged markets.
Why the next squeeze may depend on funding-rate direction
While Monday’s liquidation spike was notable, CryptoQuant cautioned that the broader pattern of funding-rate resets could still set the stage for more upside—though not necessarily in a smooth way. The firm pointed to a downward reset in funding rates over roughly 24 hours, from about 0.006% to 0.003%.
CryptoQuant suggested this kind of shift can coincide with traders increasing short exposure again, which—paired with thin liquidity—may create conditions where additional short squeezes occur if price continues to rise. In other words, the analysis implies the market is capable of repeating the same mechanism, but the trigger would still be whether leveraged positioning remains crowded and whether liquidity stays shallow.
For traders, this means the funding-rate trajectory matters as much as spot price levels. If funding rates continue to move lower while short exposure builds, the risk of another squeeze increases; if funding stabilizes or flips as shorts reduce, the upside momentum driven by liquidations may fade.
Spot demand still lags, raising questions about durability
Even with derivatives-driven buying pressure, CryptoQuant underscored a central issue: the lack of sustained spot demand. In related analysis discussed earlier, Cointelegraph reported that futures activity has been outweighing spot participation in the current trading range, with spot traders showing relatively muted interest.
In its own Monday update, CryptoQuant described spot demand as the primary hurdle to a more durable recovery. It also pointed to the absence of inflows to US spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds (ETFs), reinforcing the notion that institutional-style spot accumulation has not yet supported the move.
CryptoQuant’s concern was explicitly framed around downside risk if spot weakness reasserts itself: it commented that a break below $60,000, especially alongside rising exchange inflows, would weaken market structure and increase the risk of a move toward $50,000. The firm also stated that while selling pressure appears to be cooling, demand still needs to return to justify follow-through.
This tension—strong liquidation-driven rebounds but soft spot participation—has practical implications. When price advances primarily through leveraged short covering, the market can become vulnerable to reversal if spot buyers do not step in at higher levels.
Resistance may be anchored by short-term holder cost basis
Beyond derivatives and spot inflows, the rebound’s ceiling may also reflect where existing holders have been accumulating. CryptoQuant referenced analysis tied to short-term holders—wallets with a UTXO age of less than 155 days—showing cost basis around $68,700. That level, according to the cited view, can become resistance as underwater or marginal holders choose to sell on strength.
Additionally, earlier coverage noted that shorter-term investor behavior has been keeping BTC pinned below that resistance zone. Taken together, the data points suggest that Monday’s move may have been less about broad spot conviction and more about leveraged positioning unwinding—an environment where resistance levels tied to holder profitability can quickly limit upside.
For investors and active traders, watching how BTC behaves near the cited $68,700 area—and whether spot activity improves as funding rates evolve—may be more informative than tracking liquidation headlines alone.
Going forward, readers should watch whether funding-rate dynamics continue to support another short-covering burst and whether spot demand—along with US spot ETF inflows—shows signs of returning. Without that support, the market may remain prone to sharp, liquidity-driven swings rather than sustained trend expansion.
This article was originally published as Bitcoin $64.5K Rally Shows Low-Volume Liquidity Trap, Analysis Says on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

BitBox, the Swiss hardware-wallet provider, has released a firmware update aimed at correcting two security vulnerabilities it characterized as “severe.” According to a security disclosure published on Monday, the patches address issues that could theoretically allow a malicious host to interfere with device behavior and, in one case, affect how Bitcoin is routed during Silent Payments.
Key takeaways
BitBox says its new firmware fixes a “severe” memory corruption issue affecting Multi editions of BitBox02 and BitBox02 Nova when the device has no wallet configured.
The company also patched a “severe” weakness in its Silent Payments implementation that could potentially cause Bitcoin to be locked to an unintended address.
BitBox reported receiving no claims that either vulnerability has been exploited in the wild or caused user losses.
The update arrives amid heightened scrutiny of hardware-wallet supply chains and device security after high-profile wallet-related incidents.
What BitBox says the firmware update changes
In its disclosure, BitBox describes one vulnerability as a form of memory corruption involving Multi editions of BitBox02 and BitBox02 Nova. The issue is tied to scenarios where the device has not been configured with a wallet, meaning it’s in a state where it could be more vulnerable to abnormal interactions.
BitBox warns that a malicious host could exploit the flaw to execute arbitrary code and potentially install malicious firmware. If such an attack succeeded, it could compromise the device’s ability to protect user funds. As part of its disclosure, the company states it has not received reports indicating the vulnerability has been used to harm users.
Silent Payments patch: risk of unintended locking
The second vulnerability affects BitBox’s Silent Payments feature. BitBox says that while the flaw would not directly enable theft, it could allow a malicious host to lock Bitcoin to an address chosen by the attacker rather than the intended recipient.
In practical terms, BitBox frames the threat as leverage instead of direct extraction: an attacker could potentially demand a ransom to cooperate with restoring access to the coins. BitBox also says it has not seen reports of this issue being exploited or leading to lost funds.
Why the timing matters for self-custody security
BitBox’s firmware release lands at a moment when the hardware-wallet ecosystem is being tested on multiple fronts: device firmware integrity, secure generation of wallet data, and even the protection of customer and order information around wallet products.
Earlier coverage tied a Coldcard hardware-wallet issue to a March 2021 firmware change that remained undetected for more than five years. That vulnerability reportedly affected wallet-seed randomness, enabling attackers to brute-force impacted wallet seeds and derive private keys without physical access. Galaxy Research said last Friday that Coldcard-related losses had exceeded $112 million, with about 1,778.6 BTC reportedly swept from more than 8,600 addresses. (The earlier analysis is described in Cointelegraph’s reporting: Coldcard’s 5-year flaw reveals hardware-wallet testing gap.)
Beyond device bugs, separate incidents also drew attention to the broader risk surface of hardware-wallet businesses. Cointelegraph previously reported data breaches involving Trezor and SafePal that exposed customer and order information for more than 53,000 people. Those cases did not compromise device security, private keys, or recovery phrases. Instead, they raised concerns about targeted phishing and impersonation attempts—risks that can be especially dangerous for users who can be tricked into handing over seed material or signing approvals.
What users should watch after installing updates
Hardware-wallet vulnerabilities are not always limited to “theft bugs.” As BitBox’s disclosure shows, threats can also emerge from interaction patterns—such as how a device behaves before a wallet is configured—or from optional features like Silent Payments, where errors can affect the destination of funds rather than enabling immediate draining.
For BitBox users, the key next step is straightforward: install the firmware update and confirm the device is operating under the latest version recommended by the vendor. Readers may also want to review their operational habits around Silent Payments usage and ensure they are comfortable with how their wallet constructs and verifies outputs before signing.
More broadly, the pattern across recent incidents suggests that self-custody security depends on a full chain—not only the cryptography inside the hardware, but also firmware correctness, feature-specific logic, and the surrounding processes that keep customer interactions from becoming an entry point for social engineering.
With BitBox now shipping a fix and reporting no known exploitation, the remaining question for the market is whether broader scanning and third-party auditing will surface additional edge-case weaknesses in similar workflows across other devices and features. Users should treat firmware updates as an ongoing part of operational security, not a one-time task.
This article was originally published as BitBox Wallet Updates Address ‘Severe’ Flaws That Could Risk Funds on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

BitMart’s founder Sheldon Xia is facing fresh public pressure as the exchange’s official Chinese-language X account demanded he explain the status of user funds and lay out a verifiable repayment plan. The dispute escalates amid claims of halted withdrawals and concerns that employees have not received final pay or compensation.
Separately, the tokenized-stock market continues to reshuffle as Binance bStocks overtook xStocks to become the second-largest tokenized stock issuer by value less than two months after launch. Across the industry, banks and regulators are also pushing into crypto rails—ranging from new stablecoin distribution in Hong Kong to mandatory crypto tax reporting in Singapore—while other stories highlight custody moves, tokenization pilots, and ongoing legal fights.
Key takeaways
BitMart’s account demanded founder Sheldon Xia provide a verifiable asset disclosure and repayment plan, warning it will continue presenting evidence to regulators, law enforcement, lawyers, and media.
Xia rejected the allegations as “fabricated rumors” and said he will pursue police reporting and technical/data forensics after collecting evidence of the posts.
Binance bStocks surpassed xStocks to become the second-largest tokenized stock issuer, reaching about $624M versus xStocks’ roughly $579M on Aug. 3, based on Token Terminal data.
Singapore finalized rules requiring crypto firms to report user transactions to the tax department, with timing that starts for new users in 2027 and continues for existing users later in 2027.
Israel’s Bank Leumi plans to offer trading in Bitcoin, Ether, and Solana via Galaxy Digital’s platform from early 2027.
BitMart demands answers on user funds as Xia pushes back
BitMart’s official Chinese-language X account said some users are unable to withdraw funds and claimed that some employees have not received their final salaries or compensation. It directed Sheldon Xia to explain where user funds are and to produce a repayment plan by a stated deadline.
The account also warned that if Xia does not provide a verifiable disclosure and repayment plan, it will continue submitting supporting evidence to regulators, law enforcement, lawyers, and the media. The thrust of the message is that the exchange wants actionable accountability rather than general statements—particularly where withdrawals are reportedly affected.
Xia responded by calling the accusations “fabricated rumors.” In his reply, he said BitMart had “collected full evidence” of the content posted on X and vowed to file a police report during U.S. daytime hours and send a lawyer’s letter, seeking technical and data forensics.
What to watch in the BitMart dispute
This back-and-forth is more than a public argument; it centers on practical investor questions: whether funds are identifiable, whether withdrawals are genuinely blocked, and what repayment mechanism could be verifiable to affected users. Until there is independent disclosure or a documented plan that can be checked against on-chain activity, custodian reports, or other evidence, both sides’ claims will likely remain difficult for outsiders to validate.
Readers should watch for two key developments: (1) whether regulators or law enforcement filings are made public, and (2) whether any asset disclosure includes details that can be corroborated by third parties.
Tokenized stock market: Binance bStocks climb past xStocks
In a separate thread shaping market infrastructure, Token Terminal data shows Binance bStocks overtaking xStocks to become the second-largest tokenized stock issuer by value. According to the figures cited, bStocks reached about $624 million as of Aug. 3, moving ahead of xStocks at roughly $579 million.
Ondo Finance remained larger in the same snapshot, with total value tracked at about $927 million, according to Token Terminal. Still, the relative ranking change is notable because it happened quickly—less than two months after bStocks began operating.
Rapid growth—and the shifting ranks—behind tokenized equities
The tokenized stock sector appears to be moving faster than many early entrants expected. The same Token Terminal data referenced in the report indicates that a year earlier xStocks led with about $40.7 million, Robinhood-related issuance tracked around $37.2 million, and Ondo was far smaller at roughly $65,000. In contrast, the overall value tracked by Token Terminal has risen sharply from around $80 million to about $2.7 billion.
For investors and traders, these numbers matter because issuer size often correlates with liquidity expectations, listing stability, and integration into trading venues. However, market participants should also treat tracked “value” as a metric that depends on how specific tokens are issued, redeemed, and accounted for on-chain—so it’s worth monitoring methodology as tokenized asset ecosystems evolve.
Banks, stablecoins, and regulation push forward
Israel: Bank Leumi, described as Israel’s largest bank, announced a partnership with Galaxy Digital to let customers trade Bitcoin, Ether, and Solana via the bank’s investment platform beginning in early 2027. The plan is to make these assets available through a dedicated section of the Leumi Trade app, including buy, hold, and sell functions, including through Pepper, Leumi’s mobile banking arm.
Singapore: Singapore finalized regulations that require crypto firms to report user transactions to the tax department. The rules implement the OECD’s Crypto-Asset Reporting Framework into domestic law. The schedule takes effect from Jan. 1, 2027 for new users, while existing users are given time until Dec. 31, 2027.
Hong Kong: In Hong Kong, HashKey Exchange began beta distribution of HKDAP, described as a Hong Kong dollar-backed stablecoin regulated in the territory. HashKey Exchange is positioned as an authorized distributor, with initial retail access limited and early focus placed on institutions as the local stablecoin market continues to develop. The report also noted that the Securities and Futures Commission reportedly identified 65 fraudulent websites impersonating HashKey.
Ongoing industry friction: legal battles and tokenization experiments
There’s also continued legal and operational uncertainty in parts of the market. Binance and RedotPay are disputing whether a Singapore case connected to their nearly $473 million Hong Kong legal battle is nearing an end. RedotPay told Cointelegraph it expects Binance to discontinue the Singapore proceedings and will seek legal costs; Binance, in turn, said it is not abandoning its claims and has informed the court and RedotPay accordingly. The underlying Hong Kong allegations center on whether RedotPay diverted more than 470,000 Binance Card users by using Binance Pay funds for stablecoin top-ups outside a commercial agreement.
Meanwhile, tokenization experimentation continues. In Korea, Shinhan Asset Management signed a memorandum of understanding with Plume to develop a proof of concept for a Korean won-denominated tokenized fund. The stated aim is to test overseas use of won-denominated financial products onchain, an ecosystem that has so far been dominated by dollar-denominated assets.
Across these developments, the next signal to watch is whether regulators and institutions can translate new rules and bank/stablecoin rollouts into clear, verifiable user outcomes—especially where withdrawals, custody, and reporting obligations are at stake. For now, BitMart’s dispute and the rapid ranking changes in tokenized equities both suggest the industry is entering a phase where accountability and execution will increasingly matter as much as product launches.
This article was originally published as BitMart Founder Rumors Fade as Binance bTokens Lead in Asia on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

BitMart’s official Chinese-language X account has demanded that exchange founder Sheldon Xia explain where user funds are, provide a verifiable disclosure of assets, and outline a repayment plan by Wednesday. The dispute comes as the troubled platform continues its wind-down process amid widely reported withdrawal delays and the earlier collapse in BMX token value.
In a Monday post, the account said some users were still unable to withdraw funds and that some employees had not received their final salary or compensation. It urged Xia to publish details including BitMart’s wallets, assets, liabilities, and available reserves, warning it would escalate the matter to regulators, law enforcement, lawyers, and the media if he did not meet the deadline. Cointelegraph previously reported that BitMart announced on July 26 it would wind down the exchange, with trading ending Aug. 26 and operations ceasing on Jan. 31.
Key takeaways
BitMart’s official Chinese X account is demanding Sheldon Xia disclose BitMart’s wallet holdings and provide a repayment plan by Wednesday.
The post alleges some users still cannot withdraw and that some employees have not received final compensation.
BitMart has already entered a formal wind-down process, with trading set to end Aug. 26 and operations scheduled to stop Jan. 31.
Sheldon Xia rejected the claims, saying the account’s accusations are “fabricated rumors,” and said he would pursue police and legal action.
Arkham-tracked BitMart-attributed wallets reportedly fell from about $102 million (July 6) to around $36.5 million as of Monday, though the reasons are unclear.
Deadline set amid ongoing withdrawal complaints
BitMart’s latest challenge is framed around user access to funds and transparency. According to a machine translation of the account’s post, it said some users remained unable to withdraw and that internal compensation issues persisted for at least some staff members.
The account’s demand is not limited to a general explanation; it calls for a detailed and verifiable disclosure, including wallets, assets, liabilities, and reserves. It also set a clear escalation threat: if Xia does not deliver by the stated deadline, the account said it would submit evidence to regulators, law enforcement, legal representatives, and media outlets.
Cointelegraph attempted to contact BitMart for comment following the Monday post but did not immediately receive a response. It also remains unclear who authored the message, or whether the account is still operated under BitMart’s corporate control.
Wind-down timeline already in motion
These events are unfolding while BitMart carries out a pre-announced shutdown. As earlier coverage noted, BitMart said on July 26 it would wind down the exchange due to market and operational pressures, including BMX token volatility and user reports of withdrawal delays.
Under the company’s stated plan, BitMart ended new deposits and halted registrations as part of the wind-down. Trading on the platform is scheduled to end on Aug. 26, and the exchange’s operations are set to cease on Jan. 31. BitMart also warned that some withdrawals could undergo additional compliance and security reviews.
That backdrop matters because it suggests the dispute is not simply about whether an exchange will pay, but about the practical mechanics and timing of withdrawals and asset handling during the shutdown window.
Sheldon Xia denies wrongdoing and promises legal action
Sheldon Xia responded to the accusations in an X post on Monday, calling the claims “fabricated rumors” and saying he had preserved evidence. In a machine translation of his remarks, Xia said that during daytime U.S. time he would file a police report and send a lawyer’s letter to X, seeking technical and data forensics related to the post.
Xia further argued that employees were not being prioritized over customers, stating that “everyone is a client” and that there were no special privileges. He also previously denied that BitMart had misappropriated user assets.
In earlier communications, Xia told users not to rely on unverified claims or screenshots purportedly provided by current or former employees, reinforcing his position that the public allegations should be treated skeptically until substantiated.
Arkham wallet tracking shows sharp reductions—but interpretation remains unclear
Wallet movements are also central to what investors and users want to understand during a wind-down. According to Arkham’s on-chain entity tracking, wallets attributed to BitMart held about $36.5 million in crypto assets as of Monday.
Arkham’s data indicates a steep decline from roughly $71 million on July 26 and about $102 million on July 6. Those figures, however, come with important caveats. The tracked wallets may not represent the full set of assets controlled by BitMart, and it remains unclear how much of the reduction reflects customer withdrawals, internal consolidation, or transfers to other addresses.
In disputes like this, a key question is whether reductions in publicly tracked wallet balances reflect legitimate outflows to customers or whether they could suggest asset movement that is not fully explained. Until BitMart or Xia provides the kind of verifiable disclosure demanded by the X account—wallet list, liabilities, reserves, and a repayment framework—readers may be left comparing incomplete public signals.
What to watch next as the deadline approaches
With the promised Wednesday deadline now in focus, market participants will likely look for whether Xia provides a verifiable asset and liability disclosure and whether any repayment plan is detailed in a way that users can test against withdrawal status. Just as importantly, observers should watch how regulators and law enforcement respond to both sides’ public claims, and whether on-chain wallet tracking aligns with the explanations given for balance changes since BitMart began winding down.
This article was originally published as BitMart Founder Questions Funds, Xia Rejects Claims as Fabricated on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Binance has reportedly shared customer transaction data and personal identifying information with Russian authorities in a case involving an IT specialist accused of financing terrorism through cryptocurrency donations tied to Ukrainian fundraising campaigns, according to documents reviewed by Reuters.
Russian investigators say the information helped build the case against Yuri Belenkiy, who was detained in September 2025 and is currently awaiting trial in Russia. Reuters reports that law enforcement used Binance-supplied material as evidence supporting the charges.
Key takeaways
Reuters reviewed law enforcement documents stating that Binance provided transaction history and personal details for Yuri Belenkiy.
Russian authorities allege Belenkiy sent more than $700 in crypto between January 2023 and March 2024 to support the Ukrainian military and a banned group identified as Azov at different times.
The data transfer included sensitive identifiers such as date of birth, address, phone number, and passport information.
Binance says it cooperates with lawful information requests under applicable legal and privacy requirements, while declining to comment on the specifics of the case.
What Binance information was reportedly used
According to Reuters’ review, Russian authorities asked Binance for the transaction history of Yuri Belenkiy and received information linking him to cryptocurrency transfers. The response reportedly included not only transaction records but also personal identifiers used to connect the accused individual to the funds.
Reuters reports that the materials provided included Belenkiy’s date of birth, address, phone number, and passport number. The response also allegedly contained copies of his Russian passport and a Bulgarian residency permit.
The use of these records underscores a recurring pressure point for exchanges: even after exiting certain markets, platforms can still become a focal point for cross-border investigations when authorities request account and transaction data tied to specific users.
Allegations tied to crypto donations and a banned organization
Russia’s Investigative Committee alleges that Belenkiy sent more than $700 in cryptocurrency between January 2023 and March 2024. The alleged transfers were described as supporting the Ukrainian military as well as a group Reuters identified as the Azov Brigade or the Azov Regiment depending on the naming used at different times.
In the Russian case framing, the presence of a sanctioned or “banned” organization is central to the terrorism-related characterization. While the underlying activity described involves cryptocurrency donations connected to Ukrainian efforts, the legal outcome will depend on how prosecutors interpret intent, recipients, and the status of those recipients under Russian law.
For crypto users and compliance teams, the case illustrates how closely surveillance and enforcement can track on-chain value flows—especially when exchanges are able to connect addresses to real-world identities through account verification data.
Why the exchange’s earlier Russia exit matters
Binance announced it would fully exit Russia in September 2023, selling its local business to CommEX. Reuters’ reporting suggests that despite that earlier decision, Binance remained within the reach of Russian law enforcement requests for data tied to customers and past activity.
This detail matters for market participants because it challenges a common assumption that an exchange’s exit from a jurisdiction ends its role in later investigations. From an investor and compliance perspective, the key question is not only where a company currently operates, but also whether it retains or can access customer records and transaction logs that may be requested later.
Binance response and the compliance line
Reuters reports that a Binance spokesperson declined to comment on specific confidential law enforcement requests or the details of individual cases.
In comments shared with Cointelegraph, Binance stated that it does not make or enforce the laws of any jurisdiction, does not determine charges, and does not decide how governments use information in legal proceedings. The company said it cooperates with lawful information requests from law enforcement globally, subject to applicable legal, privacy, and regulatory requirements.
That response reflects a broad compliance position commonly used by major crypto exchanges: cooperation is framed as process-based rather than judgment-based. However, cases like this also highlight the practical risks for customers—particularly when authorities obtain both transaction records and personal identification data.
Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted that Binance planned to restrict transactions involving HTX and other crypto platforms, showing that the exchange continues to adjust operational policies as enforcement and regulatory pressures evolve. In parallel, user data requests remain a separate but highly consequential compliance channel.
As this case proceeds, the next developments to watch are how Russian courts treat the evidence derived from exchange records and whether legal proceedings clarify the standards used to link donations to specific recipients and to organizations classified as banned. For the broader crypto ecosystem, the outcome may influence how exchanges consider the scope and safeguards around information requests tied to historic activity.
This article was originally published as Binance Shared Russian Client Data in Terror Financing Case: Report on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

The U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has granted conditional approval for World Liberty Financial’s application to establish a national trust bank, despite renewed political scrutiny over potential conflicts of interest. In a notice released Friday, the OCC said the approval would be subject to regulatory and policy requirements and would allow the company to operate as “World Liberty Trust Company, National Association.”
World Liberty’s charter application, according to the OCC, proposes activities including issuing U.S. dollar-backed stablecoins and providing custody services for digital assets tied to the firm’s USD1 token.
Key takeaways
The OCC’s approval is conditional, meaning World Liberty must meet specific regulatory and policy requirements before fully moving forward.
The bank would be authorized to issue U.S. dollar-backed stablecoins and custody digital assets related to the USD1 token, per the application described by the OCC.
Criticism from lawmakers continues to center on alleged conflicts of interest involving World Liberty’s ties to President Donald Trump’s family and the OCC’s leadership.
Senator Elizabeth Warren said she introduced new legislation after the OCC action, framing it as addressing “presidential corruption” concerns in banking.
Meanwhile, the OCC has recently moved quickly on other crypto-related trust charter approvals under the Trump administration.
What the OCC approved—and the business scope
In its Friday notice, the OCC indicated that it acted in line with its statutory duties and ethical obligations regarding the application. The regulator said the conditional approval for World Liberty’s charter would permit the entity to function under the specified national trust bank title: World Liberty Trust Company, National Association.
As described in the notice, World Liberty’s plan includes issuing stablecoins backed by U.S. dollars and custodying digital assets associated with its USD1 token. The OCC characterized the decision as a pathway to operate as a trust bank while still requiring compliance with additional regulatory and policy terms.
The OCC’s notice also reflects the regulator’s process and oversight stance. Earlier, OCC Comptroller Jonathan Gould said the application would be reviewed through what he described as an “apolitical and nonpartisan process” after receiving a letter from Senator Elizabeth Warren.
Conflict-of-interest concerns drive the political backlash
The OCC decision landed amid heightened debate in Washington over potential entanglements between World Liberty and President Trump’s family. According to the reporting referenced in the OCC notice, the president and three of his sons are affiliated with World Liberty.
Separately, the OCC’s leadership has been at the center of attention: Gould was nominated by Trump in 2025. In addition, World Liberty’s own website reportedly stated that a Trump family entity controlled 38% of the company’s equity interests.
Senator Warren strongly criticized the OCC’s move. On Friday, she said she had introduced legislation aimed at stopping what she called “unprecedented corruption,” describing the OCC action as the “most brazen act of self-dealing” in the U.S. financial system. Warren and nine other senators introduced the “Ending Presidential Corruption in Banking Act” after the approval.
Legislative push follows a broader wave of OCC crypto approvals
World Liberty’s charter bid is not happening in isolation. The OCC has, under the Trump administration and Comptroller Gould, approved or conditionally approved multiple applications from crypto firms seeking trust charters to expand their U.S. services.
One recent example cited in earlier coverage is the agency’s December approvals related to Circle, Ripple Labs, Crypto.com, and Coinbase, following passage of the GENIUS stablecoin bill in Congress. Those actions form part of the backdrop for the current conditional approval—suggesting the regulator is continuing to move through crypto-focused charter applications.
That broader pace also helps explain why Warren and other lawmakers may view World Liberty’s approval as part of a larger governance concern, even as the OCC frames its conduct as consistent with legal and ethical obligations.
Congressional questions extend beyond the U.S.
In parallel with U.S. conflict-of-interest debates, lawmakers have also pushed for scrutiny of World Liberty’s ties to foreign entities and how those relationships could influence U.S. policy indirectly.
The article notes reporting that an Abu Dhabi investment company backed by Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan—the UAE’s national security adviser—reportedly purchased a 49% stake in World Liberty in January 2025 for $500 million. It also references another UAE entity, MGX, which reportedly used World Liberty’s USD1 stablecoin to invest $2 billion in crypto exchange Binance.
Additional political attention followed because Trump later issued a presidential pardon for former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao. A White House spokesperson, according to the reporting referenced here, has repeatedly said there were “no conflicts of interest” with Trump’s investments.
Taken together, the OCC’s conditional approval and the expanding congressional focus highlight a central tension for the crypto sector: regulators may continue to advance licensing frameworks for stablecoin and custody-related services, while lawmakers test whether governance safeguards are sufficient in cases involving closely held or politically connected interests.
For now, the OCC’s conditional approval means World Liberty can move closer to operating as a national trust bank, but the exact requirements attached to that approval—and how quickly they will be met—remain the immediate variables to watch. As Warren’s bill moves into the legislative process and scrutiny of World Liberty’s equity structure and cross-border relationships continues, the practical impact for future trust-charter applicants may depend as much on policy outcomes in Washington as on the regulator’s licensing decisions.
This article was originally published as OCC Greenlights Trump Family Crypto Firm for Trust Charter on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

Trump-linked World Liberty Financial has expanded its stablecoin reach through a partnership with Hong Kong-based AI platform WorldClaw. The arrangement gives WorldClaw users access to Chinese and American AI models while allowing payment through USD1. Meanwhile, the relationship raises questions about technology access and links involving companies facing U.S. restrictions across sensitive technology markets today.
WorldClaw offers about 90 models through its WorldRouter service, including 43 developed by Chinese companies. Those models include systems from Alibaba, Baidu, and Z.ai, while American providers include OpenAI and Anthropic across different commercial applications. Additionally, WorldRouter gives users access to models from DeepSeek and Moonshot, expanding its range of available AI systems.
WorldClaw accepts World Liberty Financial’s USD1 stablecoin for payments across its services online. However, the companies have not disclosed the financial terms governing their relationship or payments under the arrangement. World Liberty’s connection also extends through executive Ryan Fang, who advises WorldClaw on USD1 adoption and business partnerships involving users.
U.S. Restrictions Add Pressure To Model Access
Several Chinese developers available through WorldClaw face scrutiny or restrictions from U.S. authorities directly. The Pentagon has designated Alibaba and Baidu as Chinese military-linked companies, while Commerce Department restrictions affect Z.ai. Consequently, their presence on a single platform creates a complex link between U.S. users and restricted Chinese technology providers.
WorldClaw also offers DeepSeek and Moonshot models, which have faced allegations from U.S. officials involving intellectual property practices. Chinese authorities and affected companies have disputed those allegations and rejected claims of technology theft involving American developers. Nevertheless, access through a platform can differ from direct commercial dealings with restricted entities today.
U.S. individuals and companies can generally use Chinese AI models through available services. However, specific rules can restrict certain transactions involving companies placed on government lists and related entities. Therefore, the legal position can depend on the transaction, service structure, entity involved, and applicable U.S. restrictions.
World Liberty And WorldClaw Defend The Arrangement
WorldClaw says model access does not amount to support or approval of the companies that develop those systems. The platform also operates independently from World Liberty, according to its public position and stated business structure. Meanwhile, WorldClaw says it helps American AI companies reach customers beyond the United States.
World Liberty has defended the arrangement by pointing to broader industry practices involving multiple AI providers. The company says major American technology firms also offer access to both Chinese and American models through similar platforms. Additionally, the White House has rejected concerns about conflicts involving President Trump and World Liberty publicly.
WorldRouter reports more than 10,000 users and handles over 50 million requested tasks each day. Its privacy policy says user inputs may reach companies that provide the underlying models, depending on service requests. However, WorldClaw says it applies privacy and security measures across the platform as it manages those requests overall.
This article was originally published as Trump-Backed World Liberty Links USD1 To Chinese AI Platform WorldClaw on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

The US Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC) has granted World Liberty Financial conditional approval to operate as a national trust bank, a decision that immediately reignited political scrutiny over potential conflicts of interest involving President Donald Trump and members of his family.
In a Friday notice, the OCC said its conditional approval for World Liberty’s charter application would permit the company to proceed as “World Liberty Trust Company, National Association,” subject to regulatory and policy requirements. World Liberty’s filing indicates the bank would support US dollar-backed stablecoin issuance and would custody digital assets related to its USD1 token.
Key takeaways
The OCC’s approval is conditional, allowing World Liberty to move forward as a national trust bank only under specified requirements outlined by regulators.
World Liberty’s charter application contemplates issuing US dollar-backed stablecoins and providing custody for digital assets linked to its USD1 token.
Criticism from US lawmakers centers on possible conflicts of interest tied to Trump family involvement and the OCC leadership appointment.
Sen. Elizabeth Warren announced new legislation aimed at addressing what she described as “presidential corruption” in banking following the OCC’s action.
The decision arrives amid a broader pattern of OCC approvals and conditional approvals for crypto firms seeking trust charters.
What the OCC approved—and what it still requires
The OCC’s Friday notice frames the action as consistent with statutory duties and ethical obligations. The regulator’s conditional approval means World Liberty may be able to operate under the proposed name—World Liberty Trust Company, National Association—but must satisfy the conditions attached by the OCC before fully realizing its intended banking activities.
According to World Liberty’s application, the planned business includes issuing stablecoins backed by US dollars and custodying digital assets connected to the company’s USD1 token. For investors and users watching the intersection of crypto rails and traditional finance, the significance lies in what a national trust bank framework can enable: a regulated structure for custody and, potentially, issuance-linked services, depending on how requirements are ultimately met.
Conflict-of-interest concerns drive the political backlash
Opposition to the approval is rooted in allegations that regulators and the White House could be subject to improper influence. The OCC’s action comes as lawmakers have pressed questions about relationships between World Liberty and the Trump family.
The OCC approval followed heightened scrutiny about potential conflicts of interest between the company and President Trump’s family. The president and three sons are described as affiliated with World Liberty. The head of the OCC, Jonathan Gould, was also nominated by Trump in 2025. Separately, World Liberty’s website has indicated that a Trump family entity controls 38% of the company’s equity interests.
While the OCC stated that it acted in line with its ethical obligations, the political dispute escalated immediately after the announcement. Sen. Elizabeth Warren said she had introduced legislation “to stop this kind of unprecedented corruption,” calling the OCC’s move “the most brazen act of self-dealing our financial system has ever seen.” Warren and nine other senators introduced the “Ending Presidential Corruption in Banking Act” following the approval.
Warren’s comments and the filing of new legislation underscore a key uncertainty investors should track: the OCC may have issued conditional approval, but Congress could still push for legal and oversight changes that affect how—or whether—such bank charters are granted or operated when political relationships are at issue.
Gould said review would be apolitical earlier
Prior to Friday’s decision, Gould had indicated the charter review would be conducted through an “apolitical and nonpartisan process.” Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted that Gould made this point while referencing the review process after correspondence from Sen. Elizabeth Warren.
In the Friday notice, the OCC emphasized that its “Comptroller and staff acted consistently with their statutory duties and ethical obligations with respect to the Application.” The regulator’s language suggests it believes the same standards applied regardless of the controversy—an important distinction for market participants assessing regulatory risk.
Still, the rapid pivot to legislative action suggests the dispute is not confined to regulatory conditions. The coming months will likely determine whether Congress focuses on reinforcing ethical firewalls for bank licensing in crypto-adjacent businesses, particularly where political ties are alleged.
World Liberty’s wider ecosystem ties remain under investigation
Beyond US regulatory concerns, the approval also reopened questions about World Liberty’s relationships with foreign entities. According to earlier reporting, an Abu Dhabi investment company backed by UAE national security adviser Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan reportedly purchased a 49% stake in World Liberty in January 2025 for $500 million. Another UAE entity, MGX, used World Liberty’s USD1 stablecoin to invest $2 billion in crypto exchange Binance. The same reporting notes that Trump later issued a presidential pardon for former Binance CEO Changpeng Zhao.
A White House spokesperson has repeatedly said there were “no conflicts of interest“ with Trump’s investments, a position that lawmakers challenging the charter approval say does not address broader governance and transparency concerns.
The continued attention matters because national trust banking is tightly linked to trust, custody standards, and compliance. If lawmakers pursue investigations or new rules affecting how these relationships are disclosed or managed, the operational path for World Liberty’s stablecoin and custody plans could change.
How this fits into the OCC’s broader crypto charter push
The OCC’s conditional approval also reflects an ongoing trend under the Trump administration: approving or conditionally approving multiple applications from crypto companies seeking trust charters to expand their services in the US.
In December, the OCC approved applications from Circle, Ripple Labs, Crypto.com and Coinbase after passage of the GENIUS stablecoin bill in Congress, according to earlier coverage from Cointelegraph. That earlier wave of approvals sets a reference point for how the OCC has been moving toward regulated stablecoin and related services.
World Liberty’s case adds a new layer to that pattern because the controversy is not only about crypto compliance and licensing. It is also about the governance question of who benefits, who influences, and how regulators insulate decisions from political entanglement.
For readers, the next thing to watch is how the OCC’s conditions are spelled out and implemented for World Liberty’s charter to fully take effect, alongside whether Congress’s “Ending Presidential Corruption in Banking Act” gains traction that could reshape licensing standards for bank charters tied to politically connected firms.
This article was originally published as OCC Greenlights Trump Family Crypto Firm Under Trust Charter on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury has begun the formal process of building regulations for the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act, launching a notice of proposed rulemaking for public comment. The move is aimed at clarifying how the new stablecoin framework will be implemented ahead of the law’s scheduled start date in January 2027.
In a notice released on Monday, Treasury said it is accepting feedback as it works toward regulatory certainty for businesses operating in the stablecoin payments market. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the department “welcomes input from stakeholders as [it works] to provide the regulatory certainty businesses need to innovate and grow in America.”
Key takeaways
Treasury has opened a proposed-rulemaking process for GENIUS stablecoin implementation, inviting public comment before the January 2027 effective date.
Under the GENIUS framework, payment stablecoins generally cannot be issued in the U.S. without an associated federal or state license once the law takes effect.
The public comment window runs for 60 days after publication in the Federal Register.
Earlier GENIUS-related proposals from other regulators may still leave uncertainty for market participants, especially given reported missed internal deadlines.
Treasury starts the GENIUS rulemaking process
The GENIUS Act, signed into law last year, is designed to establish a dedicated regulatory structure for “payment stablecoins.” Treasury’s Monday notice signals the next phase: translating statutory requirements into operational rules that regulated entities can plan around.
Treasury’s timeline indicates the law’s effect is tied to the agencies finalizing their rules. Under the bill’s schedule, the stablecoin law was set to begin 120 days after agencies complete final rules, or 18 months after the act’s passage in July 2025—placing the effective date on Jan. 18, 2027. Treasury’s proposed rules are intended to feed into that schedule rather than wait for the very end of the timeline.
Once GENIUS goes into effect, Treasury said an entity generally may not “issue a payment stablecoin” in the U.S. without a related federal or state license. That restriction is central to how market participants will need to structure issuance, compliance, and oversight, and it also underscores why regulators are pushing for rules well ahead of the deadline.
Interested parties will have 60 days to submit comments after the notice is published in the Federal Register, according to Treasury’s disclosure in the proposed-rulemaking notice.
Other agencies issued related proposals in 2026
Treasury is not acting in isolation. Alongside Treasury, other U.S. financial regulators—including the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Federal Reserve Board—have reportedly issued notices of proposed rules in 2026 related to GENIUS implementation. Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted that OCC proposals were also aimed at shaping the operating environment for stablecoins and addressing areas of policy debate.
However, the lead time between proposal announcements and final rules matters for businesses planning issuance pathways. The article notes that all departments reportedly missed a July 120-day deadline that would have allowed regulations to be finalized before January. That raises the possibility that GENIUS could take effect even without fully finalized guidance, which would leave some details uncertain for regulated entities and could complicate timelines for compliance readiness.
For market participants, this creates an important distinction: while the effective date is known, the practical contours of licensing and regulatory expectations may not be fully settled by then. That gap is precisely what public comment periods and subsequent rule finalization are meant to close.
GENIUS work is also being discussed with the UK
Beyond Washington, regulators are also coordinating on how stablecoin policy developments may intersect across borders. In July, the UK-US Financial Regulatory Working Group met in London to discuss cooperation between financial agencies, including implementation of the GENIUS Act.
The UK has taken its own steps toward regulating stablecoins, according to the referenced reporting. Still, crypto industry observers have argued that the UK risks falling behind the U.S. in terms of implementation momentum, especially as the U.S. continues to move toward a defined effective date and agency-by-agency rulemaking.
That difference matters for companies planning cross-border stablecoin services, since regulatory timing can affect product deployment, licensing strategy, and operational design—particularly for payment-oriented issuers that need clarity on authorization and compliance obligations.
Why the proposed rules matter before January 2027
The immediate consequence of Treasury’s proposed rulemaking is that stakeholders now have a formal channel to influence how GENIUS translates into enforceable requirements. While the precise contents of the proposed rules aren’t detailed in the excerpt, the framework’s licensing premise is already clear: payment stablecoins are generally not meant to be issued without an appropriate federal or state license once the law is active.
In practical terms, this means issuers and partners—such as payment processors and custody providers that support stablecoin networks—will likely need to map their roles to the future licensing and compliance system. If finalized rules arrive late relative to the effective date, businesses may face a planning problem: they can prepare for the direction of travel, but they may not know every operational requirement until rulemaking concludes.
With public comment open for 60 days after Federal Register publication, the next phase will test how quickly regulators can process feedback and move toward final rules. Market participants should watch for whether agencies can align their proposals into coherent, implementable guidance before the January 2027 milestone.
As Treasury and other regulators work through comments and finalization, the key uncertainty for stablecoin issuers is timing: whether the remaining rule details will be finalized with enough lead time for licensing and operational compliance. The public comment window will offer early signals about the issues regulators prioritize and the expectations that will shape GENIUS implementation.
This article was originally published as US Treasury Advances GENIUS Act Rules After July Deadline on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury has launched a formal rulemaking process for the payment-stablecoin framework established by the GENIUS Act, opening the proposal to public comment as regulators move toward a planned start date in January 2027.
In a notice released on Monday, Treasury said it is seeking input from market participants and other stakeholders ahead of the GENIUS Act’s implementation. Under the law’s timeline, stablecoin rules were set to take effect 120 days after agencies finalize the regulations, or 18 months after the bill was signed in July 2025—placing the effective date at Jan. 18, 2027, absent changes to the scheduling.
Key takeaways
Treasury is proposing GENIUS-related rules and will accept public comments for 60 days after the notice appears in the Federal Register.
GENIUS would generally require entities to have a federal or state license before issuing a “payment stablecoin” in the U.S.
The law’s implementation is still expected for Jan. 18, 2027, but multiple agencies have reportedly missed earlier internal timing targets.
Treasury’s proposed process is part of a broader 2026 rulemaking effort involving agencies such as the OCC, the FDIC, and the Federal Reserve.
Treasury opens GENIUS rulemaking to public comment
According to the Treasury Department, the notice of proposed rulemaking is intended to help establish regulatory certainty for businesses that want to build payment stablecoin products in the United States. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent said the department welcomes feedback from stakeholders as it works to “provide the regulatory certainty businesses need to innovate and grow in America.”
The proposal matters because GENIUS is designed to move stablecoin oversight from a patchwork of approaches toward a clearer legal structure. Once the law takes effect, Treasury said, an entity generally would not be able to “issue a payment stablecoin” in the U.S. without a related federal or state license.
Public input is a key part of the process. Treasury stated that comments will be open for 60 days following publication in the Federal Register, giving industry participants, financial institutions, and other interested parties a defined window to weigh in on how the framework should operate in practice.
Inter-agency rulemaking is underway, but deadlines slipped
Treasury’s proposal follows similar steps by other U.S. agencies. In 2026, multiple regulators—including the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (FDIC), and the Federal Reserve Board—have reportedly issued their own notices of proposed rules related to implementing GENIUS.
However, the timing has become a focal point for observers. The report accompanying the Treasury notice says agencies missed a 120-day deadline in July to finalize regulations before January, raising the possibility that GENIUS could become effective without fully settled guidance.
This creates a practical problem for businesses trying to plan for compliance and product launches: even if the statute is scheduled to take effect in January 2027, companies may still be operating amid transitional uncertainty about the exact requirements they will need to meet.
For readers looking for additional background on the broader stablecoin rulemaking environment, earlier coverage noted how the OCC has advanced proposals aimed at resolving parts of the long-running debate over stablecoin yield and related practices. That context is reflected in the agency-by-agency approach to GENIUS implementation.
What GENIUS changes for payment stablecoin issuers
At the core of the framework is a licensing requirement that is meant to formalize who can issue payment stablecoins and under what authorization. Treasury’s notice indicates that once GENIUS is active, entities generally need a federal or state license before they can issue a “payment stablecoin” in the United States.
For investors and traders, this type of licensing can influence expectations around which stablecoins are likely to gain institutional support. For builders, it can affect how they structure reserves, partner with regulated institutions, and design compliance operations—especially if the market previously relied on regulatory uncertainty rather than clear authorization pathways.
It also raises an operational question that market participants will be watching: how quickly regulators will translate the proposed framework into final, implementable rules. Treasury’s comment period is designed to narrow that uncertainty, but the overall effectiveness timeline leaves limited margin for delays.
Cross-Atlantic coordination and competitive pressure
The U.S. rulemaking effort also intersects with international developments. In July, the UK-US Financial Regulatory Working Group met in London to discuss cooperation between U.S. and UK financial regulators, including implementation steps for GENIUS.
While the UK has taken steps to address stablecoin regulation, the pending rollout of GENIUS is leading some within the crypto industry to argue that the UK could be at risk of falling behind the U.S. in establishing a comprehensive, operational framework.
That perceived asymmetry matters because it can affect where stablecoin-related partnerships and compliance strategies form first. If the U.S. moves more decisively toward a standardized licensing approach, businesses may prioritize compliance-ready pathways there—at least until the UK’s own framework becomes equally concrete.
As Treasury’s proposed rules move through the comment period and toward finalization, the most important thing to watch will be whether agencies can converge on final requirements in time to reduce transitional risk before Jan. 18, 2027. If the broader suite of GENIUS regulations remains incomplete, market participants will likely press regulators for clarity on licensing timelines, compliance expectations, and how existing operations should adapt.
This article was originally published as US Treasury Advances GENIUS Act Rules After July Deadline on Crypto Breaking News – your trusted source for crypto news, Bitcoin news, and blockchain updates.