ChainGPT AI News

Headline: Trump’s $2bn windfall spotlights a new era of “political grifters” — and crypto is front and center Donald Trump’s recently published financial disclosure shows he’s not just richer than before — it suggests he made more than $2 billion in the first year of a second term, largely from Trump-branded hotels, golf courses, watches, cologne, Bibles — and crypto. For a crypto audience, the disclosure underlines how digital assets can be woven into political fundraising and private enrichment at unprecedented scale. Key figures and allegations - Trump’s disclosure lists roughly $635 million tied to a Trump “meme coin” launched after he returned to the White House — a token marketed like a digital trading card bearing his image. Many retail buyers lost money when the price collapsed; Trump’s disclosure implies he profited handsomely. - Separately, reporting has flagged a contentious three-way arrangement involving World Liberty Financial (a Trump crypto company), the United Arab Emirates, and a convicted crypto figure. That set of transactions reportedly channeled about $500 million in Emirati funds to the Trump company, while the UAE gained access to powerful American AI chips and the crypto figure later received a pardon. Critics call this a potential route for purchasing political influence; the White House denies conflicts of interest. - Senator Elizabeth Warren publicly denounced what she called “brazen crypto corruption,” tying the deals to broader concerns about influence and access. Why crypto matters here - Unlike property and other traditional Trump business lines — which have faced local pushback, legal hurdles and delayed projects (Serbia protests, a stalled Vietnam resort despite a favorable tariff) — crypto deals move fast and can be structured in ways that obscure counterparty motives and flows. That speed and opacity make crypto an attractive tool for rapid monetization and, critics argue, for circumventing ethical guardrails. Political grifters across democracies - The Trump story is part of a broader pattern in Western politics where public office becomes a platform for private gain. Examples cited in reporting include Nigel Farage in the UK and Pauline Hanson in Australia: - Farage, now the best‑paid MP at Westminster in some reports, has promoted crypto schemes via paid platforms and backed a bitcoin venture tied to former Conservative chancellor Kwasi Kwarteng. Much of his political operation has been funded by Christopher Harborne, a Thailand‑based crypto tycoon who reportedly provided around two‑thirds of Reform UK’s funding. Farage faces probes into whether he properly declared a £5m gift from Harborne and into potential lobbying tied to Harborne’s interests. - Hanson has repeatedly flown on private jets tied to wealthy backers and faced rules breaches over declarations. Expert assessments - Tutu Alicante, a human rights lawyer specialising in kleptocracy, says a formerly implicit restraint on turning public office into private profit is eroding and that today’s brazenness resembles patterns seen in authoritarian kleptocracies, where corruption becomes “aspirational.” - Duncan Hames of Transparency International UK warns of unprecedented concentration of wealth and power and the risk of “state capture” by those protecting private interests. Transparency International’s recent survey found perceptions of corruption in the US, UK, Canada and France at their worst since comparable records began in 2012. - Historian Anne Applebaum frames part of the phenomenon as tribal politics: supporters who see a leader as “one of us” may ignore or rationalise corruption. - Tom Keatinge of RUSI asks whether other democracies’ institutions could withstand the kind of capture critics say has occurred in the US. Defences and denials - The White House insists Trump and his family “have never engaged, or will ever engage, in conflicts of interest.” Officials say Trump placed his businesses under the control of his adult sons, who run them independently. Trump has also dismissed scrutiny with comments noting his past wealth. Farage says payments from backers come with “absolutely nothing in return.” What this means for crypto - The episode crystallises several risks for the crypto sector: political actors using tokens to raise large sums quickly; powerful state and non‑state actors entering opaque deals that mix finance, technology (notably AI) and political influence; and reputational fallout when retail buyers lose money while elites profit. - It also raises regulatory questions: how should campaign‑finance, ethics and national‑security rules adapt to transactions that can be routed through token issuances, private crypto firms and cross‑border intermediaries? Bottom line Trump’s multimillion‑ and potentially multibillion‑dollar crypto nexus has turned a spotlight on how digital assets can amplify the blending of politics and private profit. Whether these arrangements are legal, ethical, or will prompt new oversight remains the central debate — one with major implications for crypto markets, political accountability and policymaking across democracies. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Nigel Farage’s on-off political retirement turned into a political — and crypto — story this spring, after a surprise re-entry and revelations about large, opaque crypto-linked payments that raise fresh questions about money, influence and transparency in UK politics. What happened - On 3 June 2024 Farage publicly announced he was abandoning his short-lived “retirement” and would contest a parliamentary by-election — reversing the decision he had confirmed just a week earlier. - An awkward postscript: a filmed interview with US conservative YouTuber Steven Crowder was recorded while Farage was still saying he’d stepped back, but it aired only after his reversal. In it Farage described his lucrative media life — GB News presenting (widely estimated at ~£400k/yr), columns, reality TV and online income — saying “there’s no money in politics… for the first time in 30 years I’m earning good money.” The £5m donation that changed the narrative - The wrinkle that turned this into a crypto story emerged in April, when reporting revealed that Christopher Harborne — a Thailand-based, crypto-connected billionaire — had given Farage £5m in a private, apparently “mano-a-mano” arrangement. - The gift became public after a source spoke to The Guardian; Farage then talked to The Telegraph about it. Journalists were told the payment was “personal and unconditional” and that, because it was given before Farage returned to Parliament, he believed it didn’t need to be declared. - The Guardian and other outlets noted a potential conflict of interest: Harborne is reported to hold large investments tied to the stablecoin company Tether (figures cited in coverage put the investment scale in the billions), and Farage, while an MP, had previously publicly praised or recommended Tether. Critics say a secret multimillion-pound gift from a crypto billionaire to a high-profile political figure invites obvious questions about motive and influence. Other reported funding ties - Separately, The Sunday Times reported that George Cottrell — described in the coverage as a convicted figure and crypto gambler — also provided funding for Farage’s operations in the year before he re-entered Parliament, including staffing, security and housing. Farage has denied that housing was paid for and that any parliamentary rules were broken; Reform UK likewise says he did not breach the code of conduct. Why this matters to the crypto community - Transparency and disclosure: Large, private transfers from crypto wealth to political figures expose gaps in how political financing is tracked and declared. The absence of paperwork around the Harborne gift makes it impossible to prove intent or quid pro quo, but it also illustrates how crypto-linked capital — often mobile, offshore and private — can shape political choices without normal scrutiny. - Conflict of interest risks: If major crypto stakeholders are bankrolling political actors who then promote crypto firms or policies, regulators and the public have a legitimate interest in knowing about those relationships. - Reputation and policy: High-profile episodes like this feed narratives around crypto lobbying and could strengthen calls for tighter donation rules, donor transparency and scrutiny of crypto firms’ political influence in the UK and beyond. Political fallout and tone - Farage’s response to questions over the gift — “It’s none of your business,” he told interviewers — drew astonishment even from sympathetic commentators. There is a real political risk: the by-election in Clacton could become a focus for complaints and a drag on Reform UK’s standing, whether or not Farage wins. - The story also touches on character and motive. Critics argue Farage has always relished disruption more than detailed policy work; others suggest he was nudged back into frontline politics by generous private funding that reduced the personal cost of a return. Bottom line The Harborne payment (and the earlier Cottrell links reported by The Sunday Times) don’t prove illegal conduct, and Farage and his party deny breaches of rules. But for the crypto sector, the episode is a cautionary tale: crypto wealth is already large enough to influence politics, and without robust transparency measures those ties will continue to generate political risk and regulatory backlash. If the UK wants clearer, pro-innovation crypto policy, voters and regulators are likely to demand clearer rules on donations and conflicts of interest — sooner rather than later. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Headline: Fake “Maccy” App Delivers New Rust-Based Infostealer That Can Grab Passwords and Crypto Keys Mac users searching for the open-source clipboard manager Maccy are being lured to a lookalike site that installs a new Rust-built infostealer called “PamStealer,” Jamf Threat Labs warns. If executed, the malware can harvest passwords, browser credentials, macOS Keychain entries—and critically for crypto users—private keys and clipboard contents. How the scam works - Victims download a disk image that contains an AppleScript file named Maccy.scpt. When opened, the script displays benign-looking instructions telling users to run it in Apple’s Script Editor, while the malicious code is hidden further down in the document. - Jamf named the threat “PamStealer” because one of its core behaviors is validating the victim’s login password via macOS Pluggable Authentication Modules (PAM) before harvesting it. - The dropper uses JavaScript for Automation (JXA) and native macOS APIs to fetch a second-stage payload—avoiding common shell utilities like curl or zsh so fewer observable processes are spawned for security tools. The second stage: stealthy, Rust-based, Apple Silicon-focused - The follow-up payload is a Rust binary compiled for Apple Silicon that masquerades as Finder or Software Update. - Instead of storing configuration in cleartext, the malware derives a decryption key from a host “fingerprint” (CPU architecture, locale, keyboard layout, time zone etc.) to unlock an encrypted, integrity-checked config containing the payload URL and install path—making analysis and reuse on other hosts harder. - Once installed, PamStealer can exfiltrate browser credentials and Keychain data, monitor clipboard contents (a major risk for users who copy private keys or seed phrases), establish persistence, and send stolen data to a remote command-and-control server over encrypted channels. If the binary determines it’s not on an intended target, it shuts down quietly. Escalation tactics and timing tricks - The malware tries to gain broader access by showing a fake Finder alert asking for Full Disk Access. That prompt may be delayed—appearing up to 40 minutes after infection—so victims are less likely to link it to the original download. If granted, the attacker could read protected data from Mail, Messages, Time Machine backups, and more. Campaign context and scope - Jamf says it has not observed signs of PamStealer actively spreading in the wild but notified Apple of the findings. The company also flagged broader social engineering patterns: attackers have bought ad placements (Google, and increasingly X) or used verified accounts to steer users to malicious downloads. - Jamf noted another recent ad-driven case where a sponsored ad on X led users to dynamicmacisland[.]com and to a Terminal installation command; that payload was a recent Atomic (MacSync) stealer variant. - The PamStealer discovery arrives amid multiple campaigns abusing trusted channels and developer platforms: researchers have flagged a fake OpenAI repo on Hugging Face distributing a Rust infostealer, a malicious Visual Studio Code extension that exposed thousands of repos, and the Shai-Hulud supply-chain campaign targeting AI development tools. Why crypto users should care - Clipboard monitoring and Keychain theft directly threaten users who copy private keys, seed phrases, or wallet passwords. Malware disguising itself as legitimate macOS software makes casual downloads especially risky. Practical takeaways - Only download apps from official project pages or verified stores. Avoid running scripts pasted into Script Editor or Terminal unless you can fully trust the source. Be skeptical of ads steering you to installer commands. Do not grant Full Disk Access to unknown apps. Jamf Threat Labs published the detailed report on Thursday and alerted Apple; Apple had not commented at the time of reporting. Jamf’s Director Jaron Bradley emphasized how well these social-engineering lures work: “With many stealers, we have seen attackers purchasing Google Ad space to lure users to the malicious app. We have recently observed malicious ads being hosted on X as well. These social engineering techniques have proven to be highly successful.” Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

“$1 million Bitcoin” could be a warning sign, not just a price target — that was the striking takeaway from Ledger co-founder Eric Larchevêque’s recent comments. Speaking on June 25 in an interview with When Shift Happens (reported by Wu Blockchain), Larchevêque pushed back on the idea that a sky-high BTC price would necessarily be a healthy outcome. “A world where Bitcoin reaches $1 million or even $10 million may not be a good one,” he said, arguing that such a scenario would likely reflect deep stress in the global fiat system — think wars, fiat failures, sovereign debt crises and social unrest — rather than purely organic demand for the asset. Why Bitcoin could surge when things go wrong Larchevêque framed Bitcoin less as a currency for an ideal, stable world and more as a “final settlement” asset and wealth-protection tool that grows in importance when trust in banks, currencies and governments weakens. In a “perfect” monetary system, he said, Bitcoin would have little practical use; its value is tied to uncertainty. He also noted Bitcoin’s different meanings across jurisdictions — what it represents to someone in Iran differs from someone in France because local risks vary. Why his view matters As a Ledger co-founder (the hardware-wallet firm was launched in 2014; Pascal Gauthier later became CEO), Larchevêque’s comments carry weight in debates around custody and digital-asset safety. Crypto.news flagged his remarks alongside other macro-focused takes on Bitcoin demand, underlining a broader industry conversation: are BTC inflows driven by adoption — or by mounting fiat vulnerabilities? Macro and market context Recent research from Bitwise, cited by crypto.news, echoes parts of Larchevêque’s thesis: rising debt pressures and bond-market stress can push investors toward Bitcoin. Bitwise highlighted sovereign debt concerns and a heavy global refinancing calendar in 2026 as drivers that could keep fiat liquidity and central-bank policy in focus. At the same time, high-profile bulls maintain bullish price targets. Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ) reportedly still expects Bitcoin to reach $1 million within the next decade — a view that coexists with more cautionary takes like Larchevêque’s. The contrast underscores two readings of the same number: long-term adoption versus a flight from fiat risk. Short-term market signals Markets have shown a split picture recently. U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs experienced heavy outflows in June even as on-chain data indicated that large wallets accumulated roughly 270,000 BTC during the weakness. That divergence — ETF investors trimming exposure while whales added — keeps questions open about whether institutional demand will re-emerge. Price action has been choppy: Bitcoin rebounded to about $61,700 after ETF inflows ended a 10-day negative streak, but analysts noted BTC must reclaim $62,800 and $65,000 to confirm a stronger recovery. Bottom line Larchevêque’s warning adds a sobering layer to the popular “$1 million Bitcoin” narrative: a rapid ascent to those levels might tell us more about the health of fiat money than the strength of crypto fundamentals. Whether seen as a long-term adoption milestone or a symptom of macro stress, the $1 million target remains a polarizing — and highly consequential — talking point. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Binance saw a sharp spike in withdrawals last week as users moved billions off the world’s largest crypto exchange, data shows. According to DefiLlama figures cited by Cointelegraph, Binance booked roughly $1.23 billion in net outflows in the week beginning June 29 — a 207% jump from about $400 million the prior week — and about $3.2 billion in net outflows for the month. The sudden liquidity shift coincided with a dramatic surge in Ethereum withdrawals: CryptoQuant flagged more than 166,000 separate ETH withdrawal transactions in a single day, the highest single‑day count since March 2023. CryptoQuant community analyst Darkfost suggested the activity “could reflect genuine demand building around the $1,500 level,” noting that some investors may be removing ETH from exchanges to hold in private wallets rather than leave it on platform rails for short‑term trading. Exchange withdrawals often signal longer‑term accumulation, but they can also result from short‑term positioning, risk management or operational changes — the on‑chain data alone doesn’t deliver a single clear explanation. Market context: Ether recovered through the period, with Cointelegraph reporting a roughly 12.5% gain over seven days to trade near $1,766 at publication; Bitcoin was up about 4.3%. Crypto.news also noted ETH reclaimed the $1,700 area as ETF inflows returned, and flagged Binance’s withdrawal spike as a potential sign of accumulation even as rising open interest kept volatility risks alive. Regulatory noise probably played a role. The EU’s MiCA rules came fully into force on July 1, requiring crypto firms to hold authorizations to serve customers across the bloc. Binance reassured EU users that assets remained safe and accounted for on a one‑to‑one basis. CEO Richard Teng said users would retain access to communicated options including withdrawals after the exchange missed the full MiCA licensing deadline and adjusted some services in the region. Binance later announced it would suspend most services for EU residents after failing to secure a MiCA license by the deadline, but emphasized withdrawals would remain available and framed the move as a suspension rather than a permanent exit. Flows at other platforms mirrored the split market picture: Cointelegraph reported Bitfinex saw roughly $407.5 million in outflows and Gate about $214.3 million, while OKX and Bybit recorded smaller weekly exits. Inflows were concentrated on fewer platforms — Crypto.com added about $63 million and HashKey roughly $53.3 million, with smaller inflows at KuCoin, Gemini and Bitvavo. Bottom line: The recent exodus from Binance and the ETH withdrawal spike underline two concurrent trends — potential accumulation of ETH off exchanges and caution driven by regulatory and access concerns. Which force proves stronger will depend on whether withdrawals represent long‑term hodling or temporary repositioning in an increasingly regulated and volatile market. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Sen. Cynthia Lummis is pressing Congress to act quickly on the CLARITY Act, a high-stakes bill that could reshape how the United States regulates digital assets. Lummis told supporters the measure would “lay the foundation for the financial services of the 21st century,” calling the bill “this generation’s contribution to that legacy” and urging lawmakers to “finish the job” before a tight legislative window closes. Why it matters - The CLARITY Act aims to settle a long-running jurisdictional fight between the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) by defining when a token is treated as a security versus a commodity. - Backers say it would replace an enforcement-first approach with a written regulatory framework, giving exchanges, brokers and platforms clearer rules to follow. Critics however argue the text may not go far enough to protect users or provide sufficient detail for decentralized finance (DeFi). Where the bill stands - The bill has already passed the House and cleared the Senate Banking Committee. It now needs a full Senate vote to get any closer to becoming law. - Timing is critical: if the Senate doesn’t act before the August recess, the measure’s momentum could slip into 2027. That makes July a pivotal month for digital asset policy in Washington. Key provisions - Regulatory split: The SEC would retain oversight of investment-contract assets, while the CFTC would take a larger role over digital commodity spot markets and some exchange activity. - Market rules: The bill would impose operational standards on trading platforms and brokers, including requirements to segregate customer assets from company funds—one attempt to prevent problems that led to past exchange collapses. - Enforcement and reporting: The bill includes funding—reportedly $150 million—for crypto fraud investigations and would bring certain digital-asset firms under Bank Secrecy Act obligations, increasing reporting and anti-money-laundering scrutiny. Lingering debates Lawmakers and stakeholders are still hashing out contentious issues such as rules for stablecoin yield products, ethics and disclosure requirements, and how to oversee decentralized finance. Those debates matter because Senate leaders need enough votes in a divided chamber to advance the bill. Next steps Lummis has opened a final review window for updated bill text, with reports saying a revised version was expected around July 4—giving industry groups and lawmakers one last chance to weigh in before any floor push. For crypto firms, banks and policy shops, the coming weeks will be a crucial period of reading the fine print and lining up support. Bottom line: The CLARITY Act could bring the long-awaited legal clarity the crypto industry wants, but its fate now depends on a narrow legislative timeline and resolution of several politically sensitive issues. Watch for the revised text and whether the Senate schedules a vote before the August recess. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Shiba Inu’s shine has dimmed since its breakout 2021 run. Back then SHIB delivered eye-popping, multi-million-percent gains that turned tiny stakes into life-changing windfalls for early buyers and made the token a household name among crypto newcomers chasing quick riches. But in the years since the peak, the memecoin has largely cooled off—most holders now sit deep in the red, even as some community members continue to dream of a return to glory and the viral $1 target. Why $1 is effectively out of reach The biggest practical barrier to a $1 SHIB is simple arithmetic: supply. There are roughly 589 trillion SHIB tokens in circulation today. If each token were worth $1, SHIB’s market capitalization would be about $589 trillion—an amount that dwarfs global financial measures and would far exceed total annual global economic output. In short, hitting $1 would require a scale of capital inflows and structural change that’s essentially unrealistic under current conditions. What made SHIB soar before — and why history won’t easily repeat Part of SHIB’s 2021 ascent was helped by large supply moves. At launch, Ethereum co‑founder Vitalik Buterin was sent half of SHIB’s supply; he ultimately burned 90% of what he received and donated a portion of the remainder. That dramatic reduction in available tokens helped support the token’s parabolic move to its all‑time high. Still, the Shiba Inu team’s lead developer, Shytoshi Kusama, has repeatedly argued that token burns alone aren’t a sustainable path to lasting price appreciation. Instead, Kusama and others point to one core requirement: real-world adoption. Over the past years the team has pursued product and ecosystem development to create more use cases for SHIB, from wallets and NFTs to decentralized apps. In theory, a combination of significant supply reductions plus meaningful adoption could push prices higher—but the scale of change required to get to $1 would be staggering. Bottom line A $1 Shiba Inu makes for a catchy headline, but the numbers tell a different story. Without an unprecedented and sustained reduction in supply plus broad adoption and capital flows, that price target remains effectively out of reach. The SHIB community can still influence outcomes through development and burns, but turning that ambition into reality would be a monumental task. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Nigel Farage’s sudden return to frontline politics on 3 June 2024 has an unusual subplot that will interest anyone watching the intersection of crypto money and British politics. The U-turn After publicly confirming his intent to sit out the coming election just a week earlier, Farage announced he was back in the race — and taking the Reform UK candidacy in Clacton, a constituency described as one of England’s poorer, older and more welfare-dependent seats. The reversal surprised allies and rivals alike; one awkward casualty was MAGA YouTuber Steven Crowder, who had recorded an interview with Farage during the period he said he was stepping back. That interview, broadcast only after the U-turn, featured Farage describing a comfortable life as a GB News presenter (reported earnings around £400k a year), lobbyist, columnist and media personality. “There’s no money in politics… if you’re straight,” he told Crowder, adding that, for the first time in decades, he was “earning good money” and enjoying life. The £5m revelation Why come back? One explanation that quickly dominated coverage was a previously undisclosed £5 million personal gift from Christopher Harborne, a Thai-based investor with significant crypto holdings who has been reported as having large investments tied to Tether. The Guardian broke the story this spring; Farage then spoke to The Telegraph and revealed the payment himself. According to reporting, the gift was presented as a private, unconditional transfer from a wealthy supporter intended to secure Farage’s financial comfort. Conflict concerns That private framing has not quelled scrutiny. Journalists and opponents point to a potential conflict of interest: Harborne’s crypto investments and Farage’s past public recommendations of Tether while an MP. Farage has said the money was given before he was an MP and therefore not something he needed to declare. Critics note there is no public paperwork or formal public record of conversations between donor and recipient, making motive and timing hard to verify — and leaving open the question of whether the gift helped trigger Farage’s political comeback. Additional allegations and denials Complicating matters further, The Sunday Times reported that in the year before Farage re-entered Parliament he allegedly received financial support from George Cottrell, a long-time aide described in coverage as a convicted individual with crypto gambling ties. That support was said to have covered staffing, security and other operational costs. Farage and Reform UK have denied any breach of MPs’ rules and disputed that funds went toward housing, while Farage has insisted no rules were broken. Farage’s response and wider implications Farage has been combative with interviewers about the payments, repeatedly insisting the details are “none of your business.” That stance — and the secrecy around large crypto-linked donations — has sparked concerns about transparency, conflicts of interest and the tone of public service. Even if no rules were technically breached, the episode risks political damage: it could trigger a by-election in Clacton and further dent a party that appears past its peak. A broader lesson for crypto watchers For a crypto-focused audience, the episode highlights familiar themes: large, difficult-to-trace private transfers from crypto-linked fortunes; the reputational risk for politicians who accept them; and the regulatory and ethical questions that follow when political influence and crypto capital meet. Comparisons have been drawn to US politics, where high-profile politicians have accepted large crypto donations with comparatively little reproach — a latitude some say Farage may have believed would extend to the UK. Personality and politics Beyond cash and compliance, the affair feeds into the ongoing picture of Farage as a political operator who prefers disruption to the mundane work of government. Biographer Michael Crick argued in 2022 that Farage has long shown little appetite for detailed policy or ministerial life — and the current controversy reinforces the view that he dislikes scrutiny and is, at times, uncomfortable with the responsibilities of office. Bottom line Farage’s comeback is more than a single political drama: it’s a test case about transparency, foreign crypto money in domestic politics, and how UK institutions handle gifts and influence tied to the crypto sector. For anyone tracking crypto’s political footprint, the story is likely to have lasting reverberations. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Ledger co-founder Eric Larchevêque warned that a future in which Bitcoin trades at $1 million — or even $10 million — might not be cause for celebration, but a sign of stress in the global fiat system. In a June 25 interview on When Shift Happens (reported by Wu Blockchain), Larchevêque argued that extreme Bitcoin price levels could reflect wars, currency failures, debt crises and social unrest rather than pure crypto optimism. “Our world where Bitcoin reaches $1 million or even $10 million may not be a good one,” he said, framing the million-dollar debate as a macro story as much as a market one. Larchevêque stressed that in a “perfect” world Bitcoin has limited use — people only turn to it when trust in banks, currencies and governments erodes. He described Bitcoin as a final-settlement asset and a tool for wealth protection, most valuable when access to traditional money becomes uncertain. He also pointed out that Bitcoin’s meaning varies by context: for someone in Iran it conveys different utility and risk than for someone in France, reflecting local economic and political realities. Those nuances give his view added weight given his role in the custody conversation: Larchevêque co-founded Ledger in 2014, with Pascal Gauthier later serving as CEO. Larchevêque’s comments arrive amid broader discussion tying Bitcoin demand to macro financial stress. A recent Bitwise report (covered by crypto.news) linked rising Bitcoin interest to mounting debt pressure and strain in the bond market, noting a heavy sovereign refinancing calendar in 2026 that could keep attention fixed on fiat liquidity and central bank policy. At the same time, market flows have been mixed. U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded heavy outflows in June even as large on-chain holders accumulated roughly 270,000 BTC, illustrating a bifurcated market: ETF investors trimming exposure while large wallets buy the dip. Bitcoin later rebounded to around $61,700 after ETF inflows ended a 10-day negative streak, though analysts said BTC would need to reclaim $62,800 and $65,000 to confirm a stronger recovery. Not everyone reads a $1 million target as a warning. Crypto.news also reported that Binance founder Changpeng Zhao (CZ) still expects Bitcoin could reach $1 million within the next decade — a more adoption-driven take versus Larchevêque’s fiat-stress framing. Bottom line: the $1 million Bitcoin thesis now carries two narratives. For some, it’s a long-term adoption story. For Larchevêque, a rapid move to those levels would likely signal significant dysfunction in fiat systems — a reminder that soaring crypto prices can reflect fear as much as faith. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Binance saw a sharp uptick in customer withdrawals late last month, data shows, as traders and holders moved billions off the world’s largest crypto exchange. Key numbers - Week of June 29: roughly $1.23 billion in net outflows from Binance — a 207% jump from about $400 million the prior week (DefiLlama via Cointelegraph). - Month-to-date: about $3.2 billion in net outflows from the exchange. - Ether-specific activity: CryptoQuant recorded more than 166,000 ETH withdrawal transactions in a single day — a daily spike CryptoQuant’s community analyst Darkfost described as the biggest in over three years and the highest daily withdrawal count since March 2023. Why it matters Large withdrawals can indicate users moving assets into private wallets to hold long term, but they are not definitive proof of accumulation. Some of the outflows may reflect genuine buy-and-hold demand — Darkfost suggested investors might be taking exposure around the $1,500 ETH level and sweeping funds off-exchange — while others could be driven by short-term positioning, risk control or operational changes at platforms. Market backdrop The outflows coincided with a rebound in ETH prices and renewed ETF inflows. Ether reclaimed the $1,700 area, rising roughly 12.5% over seven days to trade near $1,766 at the time of reporting, while Bitcoin gained about 4.3%. Crypto.news noted that the withdrawal spike hinted at possible accumulation, even as rising open interest kept volatility risk elevated. Regulatory pressure in Europe The movement also came as the EU’s Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) regime came into full effect on July 1, requiring crypto firms to be properly authorized to serve EU users. Binance missed the full MiCA licensing deadline and announced adjustments to services for EU residents, describing the measures as suspensions rather than a permanent exit. The exchange reassured users that assets remained safe and held on a one-to-one basis, and CEO Richard Teng said users would retain access to communicated options including withdrawals. Wider flow picture Binance wasn’t alone. Other centralized exchanges recorded outflows that week: Bitfinex saw about $407.5 million leave, Gate about $214.3 million, with OKX and Bybit posting smaller exits. Inflows were concentrated on fewer platforms — Crypto.com added roughly $63 million, HashKey about $53.3 million, with smaller inflows to KuCoin, Gemini and Bitvavo. Overall, the data pointed to a split market: some users moving funds away from major trading venues, others reallocating to different platforms. Bottom line The surge in Binance withdrawals — and the ETH-specific activity — can be read multiple ways: potential accumulation at lower price levels, precautionary moves ahead of regulatory changes, or short-term trading adjustments. For now, the flows underscore a market reacting to both price swings and evolving regulatory dynamics. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Headline: Perplexity Co-Founder Warns “AI Safety” Is Being Used to Lock Down the Frontier — A Call for an Open Research Commons Andy Konwinski, co‑founder of Perplexity AI and Databricks, argues that the current AI safety conversation is being weaponized to centralize control rather than prevent harm — and a recent Anthropic incident is Exhibit A. What happened - When Anthropic released Claude Fable 5 on June 9, a buried paragraph in its 319‑page system card said the model would quietly degrade outputs for users it suspected of training rival AIs. Researchers discovered the clause, the internet pushed back, and Anthropic reversed the change within 48 hours. - Konwinski says the reversal misses the point. “The problem isn’t that Anthropic made a bad decision,” he wrote. “The problem is that they assumed the decision was theirs to make.” Why it matters - Konwinski laid out the case in an essay titled “Concentration of power in AI is a risk, not a solution,” and at Open Frontier, a working meeting he organized via his Laude Institute at San Francisco’s Exploratorium on June 30. Roughly 100 researchers attended. - He and others warn that centralizing access to frontier models doesn’t eliminate risk — it shifts it. AI is emerging as foundational infrastructure, like railroads, electricity, or the internet: whoever controls the base layer can reshape society and markets. A broader context - UC Berkeley’s Jennifer Chayes told a funding panel that Berkeley researchers are “all building on Chinese models because we don’t have a Western open frontier model,” and that pre‑IPO safety messaging from firms like OpenAI and Anthropic served as “a very effective fear campaign.” - Konwinski’s prescription is familiar to crypto readers: build a research commons — publicly accessible, frontier‑scale compute and resources so top researchers can reach the cutting edge without permission from private labs. Allies from the ML world - Yann LeCun, Meta’s former chief scientist, publicly echoed Konwinski on X: concentration of power and the desire for control are “by far the biggest danger of AI.” He compared efforts to lock down models to a “medieval obscurantism” — likening it to bans on the printing press — and predicted that foundation models will eventually be commoditized, with long‑term value moving to the application layer. - LeCun has put his money where his mouth is: after leaving Meta in late 2025 he launched AMI Labs in Paris with $1.03 billion in seed funding (March 2026). AMI plans to open‑source research built on world models and the JEPA architecture; it doesn’t expect commercial products for years. Why crypto communities should care - The debate echoes crypto’s own battles over permissionless innovation, open infrastructure, and concentration of power. If frontier compute and models become gated by a few players, the same centralizing dynamics that crypto fights against will reshape AI — with big implications for decentralization, censorship resistance, and who gets to build the future. Bottom line: The fight over AI safety framing is also a fight over who controls the base layer. Konwinski and others are pushing for an open, commons‑style approach to frontier compute — an argument that will resonate across both the AI and crypto ecosystems. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Bitcoin holders are sitting deeper in the red as on-chain metrics flag mounting resistance, according to CryptoQuant analysis. Quick take - CryptoQuant analyst Darkfost says Bitcoin’s True Market Mean (TMM) — a cost-basis measure for active, non-dormant coins — has risen to about $76,700, creating a focal resistance zone for the market. - At the same time, the Active Value to Investor Value (AVIV) ratio is around 0.8, implying active holders are carrying roughly a 20% average unrealized loss. - Bitcoin traded near $62,596 at the time of reporting (July 4), up 1.67% over 24 hours but still well below the TMM. What the metrics mean - TMM estimates the average acquisition cost of actively traded Bitcoin by excluding long-dormant and likely lost coins. Because it reflects the cost basis of the coins most likely to move, it can act as a meaningful resistance level: Darkfost notes the market hit a similar price area in May and many holders sold at break-even. - AVIV compares market value to active investors’ cost basis. An AVIV around 0.8 puts BTC in a “valuation discount zone,” per Darkfost, meaning the average active investor is underwater by about 20%. By comparison, previous bear-market lows pushed AVIV to roughly 0.5–0.6, correlating with average losses of 40–50%. Implications and outlook - While the current readings show widespread unrealized losses, they aren’t at the historical extremes seen in past bottoms. Darkfost argues Bitcoin may not need to revisit those deeper discounts to recover, partly because adoption is stronger in this cycle. - He also cautions that increased institutional participation has not altered Bitcoin’s long-term cyclical behavior, so investors should remain vigilant even as capital inflows continue. Capital flows and market structure - CryptoQuant’s broader research signals a bigger hurdle for the next major rally: because market value is much larger now, more fresh capital will be needed. The firm estimates a shortfall of more than $1 trillion in additional capital might be required to fuel another large advance. - Since 2022, roughly $697 billion is estimated to have flowed into Bitcoin, producing gains of about 689% — substantial, but smaller relative returns than in earlier cycles. - Institutional demand has softened recently, with U.S. spot Bitcoin ETFs recording sustained net outflows, raising questions about how quickly fresh capital can return to sustain a new leg up. Corporate strategy and infrastructure - Corporate adoption continues to expand: the largest publicly traded corporate Bitcoin holder (with more than 847,000 BTC) is exploring ways to generate liquidity from its stash without selling. Industry players such as Galaxy Digital note options or conservative lending could provide recurring income while preserving long-term positions. - Beyond treasuries, blockchain payment rails and stablecoins are drawing interest from companies building AI systems. Participants argue autonomous AI agents will likely need programmable payment networks for machine-to-machine transactions, though wide-scale use is likely several years away. Bottom line On-chain indicators show active Bitcoin holders under pressure and a clear resistance band near $76,700. Recovery hinges on whether capital — institutional or retail — returns fast enough to absorb supply at those levels, while corporate strategies and evolving blockchain payment use cases may provide structural support over the longer term. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Headline: Trump’s TRUMP memecoin paid him $636M while nearly 1M buyers lost $3.8B, blockchain analysis shows Summary: New blockchain analysis and Trump’s 2025 financial disclosure paint a stark picture: the Official Trump (TRUMP) memecoin generated roughly $636 million for Donald Trump, even as retail investors—almost one million wallets—suffered an estimated $3.81 billion in combined losses through the end of June. Key facts - Source: The New York Times report citing blockchain analytics firm Nansen and Trump’s 2025 financial disclosure. - Payout to Trump: The financial filing showed a $636 million payout tied specifically to the TRUMP memecoin and at least $1.4 billion in crypto-related income during the reporting period, largely from licensing deals and token sales by Trump-backed World Liberty Financial (WLFI). - Retail losses: Nansen found 988,905 wallets that bought TRUMP recorded cumulative losses of $3.81 billion (including realized and unrealized losses) through the end of June. - Concentration of gains: Fewer than 500,000 wallets captured roughly $4 billion in combined profits, with gains concentrated among early entrants and automated/experienced traders who were able to buy before price spikes and sell into retail demand. - Price collapse: TRUMP peaked at $75.35 and traded at about $1.76 on Friday—about a 97% drop from its all-time high, according to Nansen. - WLFI performance: Of 26,663 WLFI wallets Nansen tracked, about 85% were underwater, showing combined losses around $83 million versus roughly $23 million in profits. Nansen notes true losses are likely larger because many secondary-market trades aren’t publicly traceable. How Trump profited Nansen and the NYT say Trump benefited regardless of whether the token’s market price rose or fell because his venture generated revenue through transactions, licensing, and token sales tied to his brand. Trump promoted the memecoin heavily on Truth Social during its launch—announced three days before his January inauguration—urging supporters to buy. Voices from the market - A retail investor quoted by the NYT, Nicholas Pinto, said he put about $500,000 into TRUMP and lost roughly half, calling the project “almost a legal scam.” - White House spokeswoman Anna Kelly defended the activity, saying Trump had made the U.S. the “crypto capital of the world” and framed his actions as serving Americans’ interests. - Trump told CNBC he was not aware his crypto ventures had generated $1.4 billion but said he could determine the exact amount if he wanted, insisting there was nothing improper and that he had no plans to step away from crypto ventures. Regulatory and political fallout The disclosure has intensified scrutiny in Washington. Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand renewed calls for ethics rules to bar government officials and their spouses from creating or promoting crypto memecoins. Congress is also debating the CLARITY Act, with negotiators examining stablecoin yield rules, anti-money-laundering safeguards, and ethics provisions that could address conflicts tied to high-profile token promotions. Why it matters The TRUMP memecoin episode highlights how branded tokens and celebrity-backed crypto projects can create enormous windfalls for creators while exposing ordinary buyers to outsized downside—especially when early, sophisticated traders capture the lion’s share of gains. It also underscores growing calls for clearer ethics rules and regulatory guardrails around token launches tied to public figures. What to watch next - Any updates to Trump’s disclosures or additional blockchain forensic reports from firms like Nansen. - Congressional action on the CLARITY Act and proposed ethics restrictions targeting public officials’ crypto activities. - Further tracking of WLFI and TRUMP secondary-market activity, which could reveal larger untracked losses. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

“Summer stock crash” is trending on Wall Street — and for once the phrase isn’t pure hyperbole. Record-high bullishness is colliding with several tangible market risks just as Q2 earnings season begins, and JPMorgan technical strategist Jason Hunter warns that collision could produce a meaningful correction. What’s fueling the nervousness - Sentiment is stretched: nearly 60% of S&P 500 names carry a Buy rating — the highest share on record — leaving little room for upside surprises. - Big-cap tech weakness: the Roundhill Magnificent Seven ETF fell about 9% in June, with steep drops in Amazon, Meta, Alphabet and Apple. Hunter says the divergence among the hyperscalers “is reminiscent of the 1999–2000 dynamic,” and he’s watching their charts for signs they can stabilize. As he put it, traders are “waiting to see if those stocks find some footing this summer and potentially reduce the risk that the market could face a sentiment and position driven setback into the fall.” - Industrial metals flashing warning signs: copper — long nicknamed “Doctor Copper” for its economic lead-indicator status — is on pace for a third straight weekly decline, even though it’s still up about 8% year-to-date. Hunter views a potential topping pattern in base metals as a second early risk, since their performance historically leads the global manufacturing cycle. Wall Street’s optimism may be a setup Creative Planning’s Charlie Bilello notes the surge in Buy ratings while Hold calls have fallen and Sell ratings barely budged. Analysts are looking for roughly 22% year-over-year S&P 500 EPS growth for Q2 — the highest estimate going into an earnings stretch since 2021. “When everyone is expecting good news, there’s less room for positive surprises,” Bilello warns, underlining how a high consensus raises the bar for companies. A split in views Not everyone expects a crash. Goldman Sachs’ Ben Snider argues that a solid macro backdrop and continued AI-driven spending could push earnings past that elevated hurdle and blunt downside risk. In short: strong fundamentals and AI investment could save the summer — unless corporate results disappoint. Why crypto traders should care Equities and crypto often move together in risk-on/risk-off cycles. A sentiment-driven equity correction that gets triggered by weak Q2 results, hyperscaler downdrafts, or fading commodity cues could quickly spill into digital assets as investors unwind risk exposure. That makes the next few weeks of corporate reports a critical watch window for both equity and crypto market participants. Bottom line The “summer stock crash” talk is more than chatter: stretched bullishness, wobbly mega-cap techs and a softening copper trade together form a plausible recipe for a correction if Q2 earnings disappoint. For now it’s a warning, not a fait accompli — but one that traders across asset classes are increasingly treating seriously. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

The Major County Sheriffs of America (MCSA) has dropped its formal opposition to the decentralized finance (DeFi) protection in the CLARITY Act — marking a notable easing of a major law-enforcement hurdle for the U.S. crypto market-structure bill. What changed - In a letter to Senate Banking Committee Chair Tim Scott and Ranking Member Elizabeth Warren, the MCSA said it has moved from opposing the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act (Section 604 of the CLARITY Act) to a neutral position after “continued review” and recent discussions about how the provision would be interpreted and implemented. - The Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act would shield software developers and infrastructure providers from criminal liability for crimes committed by users of decentralized platforms — as long as those providers do not control customer funds. Law-enforcement groups had warned the language could hamper investigations into illicit crypto activity. MCSA’s conditions - The sheriffs did not give unconditional support. They asked Congress to formally include state and local law enforcement in the Treasury study required under Section 309 and any advisory groups created by the law, arguing these agencies investigate most crypto-related crime and should help shape enforcement policy. - The MCSA also urged that any new federal framework be matched by funding and operational resources for state and local authorities tasked with enforcement. Other endorsements and political timeline - The National Organization of Black Law Enforcement Executives (NOBLE) has also signaled support for the CLARITY Act, saying it can enhance investigative capabilities while preserving existing criminal enforcement powers. - Senate timing shifted this week after Sen. Bill Hagerty outlined a revised schedule: final text of the CLARITY Act is expected to be released over the weekend, with floor debate slated for after lawmakers return from the July recess (around July 13). That replaced earlier expectations of a July 4 signing. Market and political outlook - Bloomberg Intelligence now estimates roughly a 60% chance the CLARITY Act will pass in July. - Prediction markets have turned more optimistic as well; Polymarket shows odds of President Trump signing the bill before year-end back above 50%. - Not all issues are resolved: Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand continues to push ethics provisions that would bar members of Congress and their spouses from issuing or promoting crypto assets — a point still under debate. Why it matters The MCSA’s shift removes one of the more consequential law-enforcement objections to the CLARITY Act and could smooth Senate negotiations — provided the bill’s interpretation, advisory roles, and funding for enforcement are clarified to lawmakers’ satisfaction. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Nigel Farage has been reported to Parliament’s standards watchdog amid allegations he lobbied the Bank of England on cryptocurrency policy in ways that could have benefited one of his biggest financial backers — a major investor in stablecoin issuer Tether. What’s been alleged - Labour MP Phil Brickell has asked Parliamentary Commissioner for Standards Daniel Greenberg to investigate whether the Reform UK leader breached rules by meeting Bank of England Governor Andrew Bailey after receiving substantial payments from businessman Christopher Harborne. - Parliamentary rules bar MPs from lobbying ministers or public officials on behalf of anyone who has paid them within the previous 12 months. The disputed meeting - The complaint centers on a private September 2025 meeting between Farage and Bailey. Farage reportedly pressed the Bank to abandon plans for a UK central bank digital currency (the so‑called “Britcoin”) and criticised proposed curbs on stablecoins. - Brickell says Farage publicly supported Tether, opposed a proposed £20,000 per‑person limit on stablecoin holdings, promised to challenge the Bank’s position, and later claimed he had persuaded the central bank to soften its approach. - Shortly after, the Bank of England scrapped the proposed £20,000 stablecoin limit — a change Farage had repeatedly called for. The Bank says the September meeting was part of routine engagement with political figures, that Bailey and Farage disagreed on a digital pound, and has not published minutes. Political follow‑up - Labour MP Joe Powell has separately written to Bailey seeking details of the private meeting, arguing decisions about the UK’s financial system should be made openly and in the public interest rather than in private talks that could advantage individual investors. Who stands to benefit - The focus on Tether matters to crypto markets: Christopher Harborne, a UK businessman based in Thailand, owns roughly 12% of Tether, the company behind the USDT stablecoin, and is high on the Sunday Times Rich List. - The Guardian reports Farage accepted an undeclared £5 million ($6.7m) gift from Harborne before standing in the July 2024 general election. Because Farage had not yet declared his candidacy, that payment was not registered with parliamentary authorities at the time. Greenberg is already investigating whether that £5m should have been declared. - Harborne later made two £25,000 donations to Farage in January 2025 and February 2026 to fund trips, and Reform UK reportedly received a further £15 million ($20.1m) from him. Responses and context - Farage and Harborne maintain the billionaire expected nothing in return; Farage has called the payment unconditional and a private matter, though his public explanations have varied over time. - Reform UK has dismissed the allegations as “utter rubbish,” while Labour says the situation demands proper scrutiny. - Farage has long been an outspoken pro‑crypto politician, advocating for a UK Bitcoin reserve and lower capital gains taxes on crypto investments. Why it matters for crypto The probe raises familiar but significant questions for the industry: how private donations and meetings with regulators can influence policy on digital assets and stablecoins, and whether such interactions are being conducted transparently and in the public interest. With Tether central to global stablecoin liquidity, any perception that policy was shaped to favour a major investor will draw close attention from regulators, politicians and the crypto market alike. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Will Bitcoin spike to six figures this year? The short answer: probably not — at least not by much. Market-implied odds put Bitcoin’s chance of hitting $100,000 this year at roughly 17%, and many 2026 forecasts lean bearish or neutral. Bitcoin has been trading in the $58,000–$62,000 band recently, far below its October peak near $126,000, and most models point to more sideways action before any decisive move. Where Bitcoin stands now - Bitcoin closed June around $60,000 after starting the year above $93,000 and posting a 21‑month low along the way. That leaves current forecasts starting from a relatively weak base. - July has historically been supportive: Bitcoin closed higher in 9 of the last 13 Julys, with an average return north of 7% — a seasonal pattern some traders are watching for a short-term lift. Key forces shaping the outlook Analysts repeatedly cite three factors driving the near-term picture: - Spot ETF flows: net outflows have pressured price momentum and keep investors cautious. - The U.S. dollar: a stronger dollar tends to weigh on crypto demand. - The Federal Reserve: muted forward guidance from the Fed leaves markets guessing on policy direction. Institutional views: mixed signals Wall Street remains split. Standard Chartered still expects $100,000 by year-end and sees current weakness as a potential buying opportunity if ETF selling eases. Citi moved the other way, lowering its 12‑month target from $143,000 to $82,000, pointing to ETF outflows, softer investor demand, and slow U.S. regulatory progress as reasons for the downgrade. Depending on which desk you read, the near-term Bitcoin forecast can look very different. What analysts are saying - James Butterfill, head of research at CoinShares: “More constructive price action likely occurring in the second half of the year.” Many institutional analysts share the view that the first half of 2026 was a rebuilding period rather than a lost year. - Iliya Kalchev, analyst at Nexo, is more optimistic: if financial conditions loosen — via easier policy, a softer dollar, or renewed liquidity — Bitcoin could revisit and even exceed prior highs. For that to happen, long-term holders would need to stop selling, institutional demand would need to remain steady, and the Fed would have to pivot toward friendlier rates. The downside case There’s a credible bearish scenario too. If the Fed stays hawkish, the dollar strengthens further, and ETF outflows persist, Bitcoin could slide toward technical support in the $53,000–$57,000 range. The market will be closely watching the Fed’s late‑July meeting for any hints; there are no fresh economic projections due before September, which leaves a degree of uncertainty. Bottom line Bitcoin’s path for the remainder of the year hinges on a handful of triggers: a softer Fed, renewed ETF inflows, and tangible progress on U.S. crypto legislation. Absent one of those developments, the consensus view — reflected in prediction markets and many institutional forecasts — is for more range-bound trading rather than a rapid dash to $100,000. Plenty of analysts still hope for a larger move before year-end, but for now, the safer bet is sideways action until one of the key catalysts changes the narrative. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

Revolut to remove Tether’s USDT for many European users as MiCA rules bite Revolut has told affected customers it will phase out support for Tether’s USDT from eligible European accounts as the EU’s Markets in Crypto‑Assets (MiCA) rules come into force. The fintech giant is giving users a window to act — but the timeline is tight. Key dates and actions - Customers can buy USDT on Revolut until July 6. - New USDT deposits will be blocked starting July 30. - Users have until Aug. 31 at 12:00 PM GMT to sell, withdraw, or transfer USDT to supported external wallets. - After that deadline, any remaining USDT balances in eligible Revolut accounts will be automatically converted to the account’s base currency at the prevailing market price, per Revolut’s delisting policy. Revolut has notified impacted customers via app push notifications and email, and clarified the delisting applies only to users who received these notices. Jurisdictions where Revolut continues to support USDT will not be affected. Why this is happening Revolut linked the move directly to MiCA, the EU’s new regulatory framework that, as of July 1, imposes licensing, reserve, disclosure, and supervision requirements on stablecoin issuers and crypto service providers operating in the bloc. Tether’s USDT has not been authorized under MiCA, and Revolut joins other platforms that have started restricting EU access to the stablecoin because it lacks the required authorization. Tether has pushed back. CEO Paolo Ardoino has argued MiCA’s reserve-related rules don’t fit the design of the world’s largest stablecoin, raising concerns about reserve composition, liquidity management, and redemption mechanisms. Regulatory scrutiny beyond MiCA MiCA isn’t the only regulatory pressure Tether faces. Following an OFAC update on July 1, Tether froze USDT balances in 131 wallets on the TRON blockchain after the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control added 134 crypto wallet identifiers (131 TRON and three Monero addresses) tied to ISIS‑K to its sanctions list. While that action is separate from MiCA, it underscored Tether’s capacity to freeze tokens in response to law enforcement and sanctions activity — a point of practical relevance for custodial platforms and users. What this means for users and the market Revolut’s decision highlights how MiCA is already reshaping which stablecoins European customers can access. For users holding USDT on Revolut, the immediate priorities are to sell, withdraw, or move balances before the Aug. 31 cutoff, or accept automatic conversion to their account currency. For the broader market, expect continued fragmentation as platforms reassess which tokens they can legally support across jurisdictions under new regulatory regimes. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

DZ Bank rolls out crypto trading to millions via Germany’s cooperative banks Germany’s DZ Bank is bringing cryptocurrency trading into the mainstream by enabling retail customers at cooperative banks to buy and sell digital assets through their regular bank accounts. Bloomberg reports the new service—built on a platform developed by DZ Bank—is already being rolled out and supports major coins such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, Litecoin and Cardano. How it works - Participating cooperative banks can offer crypto trading directly within their existing online and mobile banking channels, so customers don’t need separate exchange accounts. - Each cooperative bank decides independently whether to activate the service for its clients; DZ Bank says interest from member institutions has been strong and expects hundreds of banks to add the offering over time. Bank-led expansion across German retail banking The move reflects a broader shift in Germany’s banking sector, where institutions that long avoided retail crypto services—citing volatility and investor-protection concerns—are now integrating digital-asset access. DekaBank is launching a comparable platform for Germany’s savings banks, with a staged rollout planned later this year as individual savings banks opt in. Why banks are moving in Supporters argue the bank-centric approach fits consumer preferences: Bloomberg-cited survey data show Germans trust their primary bank more than twice as much as dedicated crypto trading platforms. Banks also see crypto as a way to attract younger customers who expect investment products inside digital banking apps, and to keep pace as cryptocurrencies move further into mainstream finance. Risk warnings and regulatory caution Despite growing availability, academics and banking groups continue to emphasize that cryptocurrencies are highly speculative and can lead to significant losses. Germany’s savings banks association has stressed that crypto trading through banks is aimed at self-directed investors who understand those risks and are prepared to trade without advice. Tax landscape and policy changes The expansion comes amid potential changes to Germany’s tax treatment of crypto. Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil said during the 2027 federal budget presentation that the government plans to “tax cryptocurrencies differently” as part of measures intended to raise roughly €2 billion and strengthen efforts against financial and tax crime. Under current rules, private crypto profits are generally taxed if assets are sold within one year of purchase; assets held longer than 12 months are usually exempt from capital gains tax—a policy that has made Germany relatively attractive to long-term crypto holders. Bottom line By embedding crypto trading into traditional banking channels, Germany’s cooperative and savings banks are lowering the friction for retail adoption while retaining established trust relationships. The rollout is optional for member banks and carries cautionary guidance about risk and investor suitability, but its scale could substantially broaden consumer access to digital assets across the country. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news

India has launched a criminal probe after reports that Indian nationals were trafficked to cyber scam compounds near the Thailand–Myanmar border and forced to run online investment and cryptocurrency fraud operations. What happened Maharashtra police say they registered a case after the wife of a 24-year-old man reported that her husband — who answered a social-media ad for a graphic-design and data-entry role in Thailand paying about Rs 70,000 (roughly $815) a month — was instead taken to a compound on the Thailand–Myanmar border. Authorities allege his passport and travel documents were confiscated, he was made to work 16–18 hours a day on cyber fraud schemes, and that captives who refused orders were subjected to electric shocks and other abuse. The victim reportedly contacted family briefly before communications were cut off; he also claimed hundreds of other Indians were being held in similar compounds, a claim that has not been independently verified. Separate regional reports describe another Maharashtra resident who travelled for a call-centre job and remains trapped in a similar compound. Victims in these reports say they were forced into online investment and cryptocurrency scams — including creating fake social-media profiles to lure investors. One family alleges captors demanded Rs 8 lakh (about $9,300) to secure a relative’s release. State authorities said efforts to bring those trapped home are under way. Official response Because the case appears to involve an overseas trafficking network, India’s Ministry of External Affairs has been informed and central agencies are assisting the Maharashtra investigation. India has carried out previous rescues: earlier this year more than 120 nationals were repatriated from cyber scam centres in Myanmar, with additional operations conducted the prior year. Regional pattern and enforcement The allegations feed into growing concern about organised criminal networks operating from compounds across Myanmar, Cambodia, Laos and neighbouring countries. Reports say these groups recruit via fake overseas job offers for IT, customer support, digital marketing and data-entry roles, confiscate passports on arrival, and coerce recruits into running online fraud and crypto scams. Governments and regulators are increasingly taking action. In May, the U.S. Treasury’s Office of Foreign Assets Control sanctioned a Myanmar militia, its leader and senior members, alleging they facilitated cyber scam syndicates, cryptocurrency-related fraud, human trafficking and cross-border smuggling. The Treasury has noted U.S. victims lost more than $2 billion to crypto-related fraud in 2022 and more than $3.5 billion in 2023. The FBI’s latest Internet Crime Report puts crypto-linked losses even higher, reporting $11.4 billion in overall cryptocurrency-related losses and saying many illicit networks operate from Southeast Asian compounds. Myanmar’s military has also proposed harsher domestic penalties: a draft Anti-Online Scam Bill published in May would impose prison terms of 10 years to life for operating online scam centres or committing digital-currency fraud, and it allows capital punishment for operators who use violence, torture, unlawful detention or cruel treatment to force people into scams. What it means for crypto users These developments underscore the human and criminal infrastructure behind many crypto investment scams. Law enforcement and diplomatic channels are stepping up, but victims and jobseekers remain vulnerable to trafficking via fraudulent job listings. The investigations could increase scrutiny on crypto platforms and payment flows tied to such networks, and may lead to further sanctions and cross-border enforcement efforts as governments try to disrupt the compound-based fraud model. Read more AI-generated news on: undefined/news