maltipal

Stablecoins – digital currencies designed to maintain a steady $1 value – have surged to a record market capitalization of approximately $310 billion as of mid-December 2025. Once primarily tools for crypto traders, they are increasingly eyed for everyday payments, remittances, and investments, thanks to clearer U.S. regulations. But financial experts warn that their rapid expansion could introduce risks to the broader financial system, though direct threats to individual finances remain limited for most users.
What Are Stablecoins?
Stablecoins are cryptocurrencies pegged to assets like the U.S. dollar, typically backed by reserves such as cash, short-term U.S. Treasury bills (T-bills), or equivalents. Users can acquire them quickly via exchanges using bank transfers or cards, then store them in digital wallets for fast, low-cost global transactions.
Leading issuers include:
Tether (USDT): The dominant player with around $186 billion in circulation (about 60% market share). Tether reported billions in profits from interest on reserves.
Circle (USDC): Roughly $78 billion in circulation, known for greater transparency and ties to traditional finance.
Together, major issuers hold over $200 billion in T-bills, making them significant buyers comparable to large institutions or nations.
From Crypto Niche to Mainstream Potential
Five years ago, stablecoins were mainly used for trading volatile cryptocurrencies. Today, their market exceeds the annual GDP of many countries.
A key catalyst: The GENIUS Act (Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins), signed into law by President Donald Trump in July 2025. This bipartisan legislation provides a federal framework for “payment stablecoins,” requiring strict reserves, audits, transparency, and anti-money laundering compliance. It legitimizes stablecoins for traditional banking and payments while excluding them from certain securities regulations.
Companies are responding:
President Trump’s family launched USD1 through World Liberty Financial earlier this year, backed by Treasuries and used in major deals.
Retail giants like Walmart and Amazon have explored issuing or integrating their own stablecoins to reduce fees on cross-border and e-commerce transactions.
Banks, tech firms, and others are entering the space, with hundreds of stablecoin variants emerging.
Proponents highlight benefits: Near-instant transfers, minimal fees for international remittances, and accessibility in underbanked regions.
Expert Concerns: Systemic Risks vs. Personal Impact
Financial experts express caution about the sector’s growth:
Lack of protections: Unlike bank deposits, stablecoins offer no FDIC insurance, fraud safeguards, or guaranteed redemption in crises.
Illicit use potential: Limited oversight could enable money laundering or sanctions evasion, though the GENIUS Act strengthens compliance.
Systemic ties: Heavy investment in T-bills links stablecoins to U.S. government debt markets. A sudden loss of confidence (e.g., a “run” on a major issuer) could spill over, affecting Treasury prices or liquidity.
Growth projections: Private estimates suggest the market could reach $1–3 trillion by 2030, boosting Treasury demand but potentially disrupting bank deposits or monetary policy transmission.
For personal finances:
Direct risks are low if you avoid holding large amounts in stablecoins – most users treat them as transactional tools, not savings.
Indirect risks: Broader instability could affect markets or interest rates, but experts note stablecoins remain a small fraction of global finance.
Many view regulated stablecoins as safer than unregulated crypto, potentially enhancing dollar dominance globally.
As adoption accelerates under new rules, stablecoins could reshape payments – but experts advise caution, sticking to reputable issuers and treating them as utilities, not insured investments. The sector’s evolution will depend on ongoing regulation and market confidence.

Why Scott Bessent Is Cracking Down on Congress Stock Trading
Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has renewed his call to end congressional stock trading, highlighting outsized returns by lawmakers that far outpace market benchmarks.
In 2024, Senate Finance Committee Chair Ron Wyden’s portfolio surged 123.8%, compared with the S&P 500’s 24.9%, while Speaker Nancy Pelosi’s portfolio returned 70.9%.
Bessent Urges End to Congressional Trading as House Leaders See Outsized Returns
Scott Bessent’s warning comes as asset managers take record-long positions in US equities. S&P 500 futures net long exposure has reached 49%, near historic highs.
Analysts say the intersection of extreme market positioning and growing political scrutiny raises questions about timing.
According to EndGame Macro, a renowned analyst, regulatory attention to insider or political trading typically appears late in bull cycles, often when public frustration and valuations peak.
“When the rules tighten for the people closest to the information, it’s often because the upside has already been largely harvested,” the analyst said.
A growing body of research highlights the magnitude of congressional outperformance. A National Bureau of Economic Research working paper by Shang-Jin Wei and Yifan Zhou found that congressional leaders outperform peers by roughly 47% annually after assuming leadership positions.
The analysis identifies two drivers:
Direct political influence
Such as trading before regulatory actions or investing in firms expected to gain government contracts, and
Access to nonpublic information
About home-state or donor companies, information that is unavailable to the average investor.
Historical examples illustrate this advantage.
Pelosi reportedly achieved cumulative returns of 854% after the 2012 STOCK Act, compared with 263% for the S&P 500.
Wyden, as Senate Finance Committee chair in 2024, allegedly gained 123.8%, while his 2023 performance was 78.5%, well above the S&P 500’s 24.8%.
These figures exceed many professional hedge fund returns, highlighting significant information asymmetries and raising concerns over market fairness.
Bessent’s intervention frames the debate as a credibility issue for Congress rather than a partisan matter.
“When members of Congressional leadership post returns that far exceed many of the world’s top performing hedge funds, it undermines the fundamental credibility of Congress itself,” he said in the post.
Public support for banning congressional trading is strong, with a 2024 YouGov poll showing 77% of Republicans, 73% of Democrats, and 71% of independents in favor.
Legislative efforts, such as the Restore Trust in Congress Act, would require lawmakers and their close relatives to divest individual stocks within 180 days. However, it would allow them to retain mutual funds and ETFs.
Yet, House leaders have not scheduled a floor vote, and only 23 of the required 218 signatures for a discharge petition had been gathered by December 2024.
Opinions remain divided among lawmakers, with some warning that restrictions could deter qualified candidates, while others call reform “common sense” and a matter of good governance.
Record-Bullish Market Positioning Signals Maturing Cycle
The debate on congressional trading comes against a backdrop of historic bullishness in equities. The Kobeissi Letter reports that net long positions in S&P 500 futures increased by 49%, representing a rise of roughly 400% since 2022.
This is nearly double the long-term average and more than two standard deviations above historical norms.
Nasdaq 100 futures are similarly elevated, and the S&P 500 reached 37 all-time highs in 2025, the third-most since 2020.
Despite this, Bank of America (BofA) issues a cautious outlook. The bank forecasts the S&P 500 to reach 7,100 by the end of 2026, only 4% above current levels. BofA cites AI-related valuation pressures and potential tech-driven consumption slowdowns.
Analysts suggest that the combination of extreme positioning and potential regulatory action signals market maturity rather than a new expansion. The timing of reforms potentially highlights when insiders have already captured a significant portion of the upside.
This convergence of record bullish bets and growing regulatory scrutiny serves as a barometer of market cycles, rather than an immediate warning of a crash. It is also a reminder that late-cycle dynamics are shaping both equity and risk asset markets, including crypto.$ETH

日本加息可能使比特幣升至70,000美元，分析師警告。
日本銀行預計本週將加息25個基點。
分析師警告，這一舉措可能會將比特幣（BTC）推高至70,000美元。
中央銀行的政策會議將於星期三開始，利率決策公告定於星期四。
根據Polymarket數據，預測市場將加息的概率賦予98%。
發生了什麼事
日本銀行將基準利率從0.5%提高至0.75%。
此次加息將標誌著自1月份以來的首次加息，並達到1995年以來的最高水平。

唐納德·特朗普最近的關稅措施在2025年大幅提高了美國的貿易壁壘，針對中國、印度、歐盟和墨西哥等主要夥伴，並將全球貿易推入一個更加碎片化、高成本的階段。這一策略正在提高關稅收入和對外國政府的壓力，但同時也在推高價格、擾亂市場，並引發國內外的法律和政治反擊。特朗普在2025年所做的事情是對幾乎所有美國進口商品徵收基準10%的關稅，使用緊急經濟權力，對擁有大量貿易順差的國家徵收更高的“相互”稅率。對中國的關稅大幅上升，一些類別的實際稅率現在接近或超過60%，並將新的或更高的關稅擴展到像歐盟和墨西哥這樣的夥伴，通常與緊迫的談判截止日期相連。宣布或實施了額外的行業或國家特定的漲價，例如對印度商品徵收的高額關稅，這使得印度的整體關稅率接近50%，部分與其進口俄羅斯石油有關。美國的平均關稅水平已上升到一個多世紀以來的最高點，增加了美國製造商的投入成本，並推高了消費者價格，即使政府辯稱國內產業隨著時間的推移會獲益。隨著企業考慮將生產搬回國內或重新安排貿易，金融市場和全球供應鏈面臨重新的不確定性，而一些經濟學家指出，世界貿易量雖然彎曲但並未破裂，夥伴們重新調整流量並尋求新的區域協議。在美國政治體系中，兩黨的國會成員開始挑戰特定的措施——例如印度關稅——認為這是超越權限或對經濟有害的行為，這表明對這一關稅策略的法律和立法限制可能會增長。現在誰受到的影響最大中國仍然是主要目標，在技術和關鍵材料等戰略領域面臨非常高的關稅和更嚴格的出口管制，這加深了兩個經濟體之間的脫鉤壓力。盟友和夥伴——包括歐盟、墨西哥、加拿大和印度——儘管安全關係緊密，卻越來越多地被捲入爭端，因為關稅既用作貿易讓步的槓桿，也作為與更廣泛的外交政策目標相關的工具。依賴美國市場的發展中經濟體，如一些亞洲和拉丁美洲的出口國，面臨需求波動，並可能加快與其他區域集團整合的努力。接下來要關注什麼貿易夥伴是否會選擇對抗（WTO案件、報復性關稅）或談判（行業協議、管控貿易安排）來緩解壓力。美國製造商實際將生產回流或多樣化的速度，這將決定承諾的就業和戰略韌性的增長是否會實現，或者美國消費者和企業的成本是否會簡單地上升。國會和法院挑戰的結果，可能會縮小總統的緊急關稅權力，並重塑這一以關稅為先的貿易理論能在2025年後推進的程度。特朗普在2025年全球關稅前線的插圖，突顯美國位於中心，關稅壓力向中國（60%+）、印度（50%）、歐盟（最高30%）和墨西哥（約30%）輻射。