The US House Financial Services Committee announced today it will conduct a markup on the CLARITY Act on June 10. This is a great development on the path to regulated digital assets in the US. The bill aims to lay down a comprehensive set of rules for the growing world of cryptocurrencies. With bipartisan support and industry backers, it is now well on its way to one of the most disruptive periods of its journey — the committee review and amendment process. The CLARITY Act is pitched to clarify how digital assets, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, and stablecoins, are regulated. For years, the crypto industry has complained about murky regulations and conflicting guidance from federal agencies. The bill is trying to define what digital assets are. It also seeks to split the regulatory authority between the SEC and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC). That will allow innovation in crypto to continue — while ensuring that consumers and markets are protected from fraud and abuse, lawmakers who introduced the bill last week on May 29 said. The Financial Services Committee will review the bill at the June 10 markup at the Rayburn House Office Building. They will offer amendments, argue over its wording, and mold it into a final version that could be sent to the full House for a vote. Lawmakers push CLARITY Act forward amid GENIUS Act uncertainty Support for the CLARITY Act is building. That’s celebrated as a boon by crypto businesses, developers, and investors. But there’s a catch: the bill’s future could rely on the fate of another piece of legislation making its way through the Senate — the GENIUS Act . The GENIUS Act aims for stablecoins, several types of crypto that track things in the real world — like the US dollar. The crypto economies rely heavily on stablecoins, the gas on which many digital assets famously ride. The Senate made major progress on June 4 when it took a key procedural vote on the GENIUS Act. The vote was strong and bipartisan — 66 in favor to 32 against. This provides evidence that legislators of both stripes understand the need for new financial rules in an era increasingly dominated by blockchain. The GENIUS Act would impose tight regulations on stablecoin issuers, such as full asset backing and periodic disclosures of reserves. Lawmakers argue that this will foster trust from the public and ultimately allow innovation to persist. Because stablecoins are so integral to the digital asset economy, many believe the GENIUS Act must pass before the CLARITY Act can effectively go to work. If the GENIUS Act flounders in the Senate, it would sap momentum for the CLARITY Act in the House. Crypto advocates push to influence CLARITY Act language With the markup date approaching, crypto advocates are fighting to shape the language that will be included in the final iteration of the CLARITY Act. Eight industry groups have banded together to advocate for language in the bill featuring the Blockchain Regulatory Certainty Act, another proposal that would shield DeFi developers — those who code up decentralized financial platforms but don’t hold user funds. They argue they should not be treated like banks or financial institutions because they do not hold assets. Without these protections, developers fear being saddled with regulations designed for completely different businesses. They also fear conflicts of interest in the legislative process. Yet some warned that clear ethical guidelines needed to be established, or there would be public distrust. There have been suggestions to prohibit federal officials from owning or advocating for cryptocurrencies in office. These are thought necessary to ensure a level playing field for regulating virtual assets and to prevent corruption. Cryptopolitan Academy: Coming Soon - A New Way to Earn Passive Income with DeFi in 2025. Learn More
CME Bitcoin futures have reached a new milestone with 217 large traders active, marking a substantial 36% growth since early 2024. This surge underscores a pronounced uptick in institutional participation
Market might see rapid retrace thanks to accumulation in background
XRP’s price action is currently exhibiting a back-and-forth pattern around $2.20, but an interesting technical analysis suggests it may soon leave this price level. A chart analysis posted by a crypto analyst on the social media platform X has given an interesting projection about XRP’s next move. By overlaying XRP’s current weekly chart with its explosive 2017 fractal, the analyst hints that the altcoin might be on the verge of a repeat performance that sends it far beyond its current price range. 2017 XRP Fractal Overlaid Technical analysis of XRP price action on the weekly timeframe reveals an interesting pattern that has been unfolding over multiple weeks. This interesting pattern began with the intense XRP price rally in Q4 2024, which eventually ended in a consolidation around $2, as seen in the current price action. This, in turn, has led to the formation of a flag pattern that is still playing out. Related Reading: Analyst Shows 3-Cycle Ride For XRP Price To Reach $46 The core of the analyst’s technical analysis lies in the uncanny resemblance between XRP’s present market structure and the bullish pattern that preceded the historic 2017 rally. As such, the analyst overlaid the 2017 fractal onto the current price action, revealing a formation that mirrors a giant bull flag, which is often interpreted as a technical continuation pattern. The analysis also places into focus XRP’s ongoing interaction with the 50-week exponential moving average (EMA) on the weekly candlestick timeframe. Back in 2017, this level acted as a support base for XRP’s vertical breakout. Now, the current pattern shows the cryptocurrency is once again consolidating directly above this moving average, which the analyst describes as the foundation of a giga bull flag. The resemblance doesn’t stop at price structure. The analyst also draws attention to the RSI behavior. Back in 2017, the RSI entered a flat compressed zone between two spikes on the weekly timeframe, a pattern that appears to be repeating today. The first RSI peak has already formed, and the current flattening phase suggests a possible second spike may soon follow, which could correlate with a breakout in price if the fractal stays valid. What To Expect If 2017 Fractal Plays Out Again? The implications are exciting if XRP follows the same trajectory as it did in 2017. The overlay suggests a price rally beyond $20, which would represent the biggest rally so far in XRP’s price history. The projected move would take XRP far beyond its 2018 all-time high of $3.40 and establish a new price floor above double digits for the cryptocurrency. This projection aligns with other projections in similar technical analyses from other cryptocurrency analysts. Related Reading: XRP Price Is Now Targeting $4 After Reversal From ‘Buy Zone’ At the time of writing, XRP is trading at $2.2, down by 2,3% in the past 24 hours. Whether or not XRP follows the 2017 pattern exactly remains to be seen, but the similarities in price behavior, RSI compression, and EMA support are difficult to dismiss. Featured image from Getty Images, chart from Tradingview.com
An official change request listed on the ISO 20022 website has been approved, and it may significantly alter the future of digital value transfer. Submitted by The Mojaloop Foundation for Payments and Clearing Settlement. This request was approved in late 2024 and proposes an implementation that references Ripple’s Interledger Protocol (ILP), a technology designed to enable seamless, cross-network payments. This approval could significantly benefit XRP in the coming months. This development surfaced through a post on X by crypto researcher SMQKE (@SMQKEDQG), who published a short video highlighting the approved ISO change request. In a follow-up, he shared several images pointing to Ripple’s ILP as a key component for value transfer across otherwise incompatible networks. Notably, the documentation proves that the Interledger Protocol is not a theoretical framework, but is already functioning and integrated with Ripple’s existing infrastructure. A Confirmed Connection Between ILP, XRP, and SWIFT The documentation attached to SMQKE’s post reinforces a crucial technical point: Ripple’s Interledger Protocol utilizes XRP in the process of value movement. This integration offers significant potential to modernize global remittance and settlement systems while embedding XRP into the architecture. This functionality becomes especially relevant in the universal mode of ILP, where transactions can occur between untrusted connectors, bypassing the need for notaries by using XRP as a bridging asset . Another excerpt specifies that the ILP system relies on the XRP Ledger (XRPL) for final settlement. The diagram outlines the payment flow, showing how connectors facilitate interim exchanges. All claims are ultimately recorded and redeemed on the XRPL. SMQKE also attached a document from SBI Group, a long-time Ripple partner , which acknowledges Ripple’s hybrid technology that combines ILP and XRP Ledger. The slide explains that XRP can be used as a bridge currency in international transfers, eliminating the need for multiple local currencies while enhancing interoperability. YES — RIPPLE’S INTERLEDGER PROTOCOL USES XRP TO MOVE VALUE ACROSS NETWORKS Documented 4x. https://t.co/shLyD5rR2L pic.twitter.com/RJx3di7v63 — SMQKE (@SMQKEDQG) June 4, 2025 SWIFT Network Compatibility Marks a Turning Point The significance of ISO 20022’s approval lies in the standard’s role as a global foundation for financial messaging, particularly within systems like SWIFT. With Ripple’s ILP now officially linked to a change request involving the ISO 20022 standard, it positions Ripple’s infrastructure as interoperable with the widely used messaging standard. This approval is even more notable because SWIFT has confirmed full migration to the ISO 20022 standard by November. Ripple’s payment system is ISO 20022 compliant, and this integration of ILP into the system gives way for potential XRP adoption in SWIFT’s ecosystem. Disclaimer : This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are advised to conduct thorough research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses. The post SWIFT Quietly Initiates This Ripple Approval. Here’s Why This is Good for XRP appeared first on Times Tabloid .
BitcoinWorld MiCA Regulation: Crucial Clarity from Central Bank of Ireland on Bitcoin, Ethereum The landscape of digital assets is constantly evolving, and understanding how regulators view cryptocurrencies is paramount for anyone involved in this space. A significant piece of clarity has emerged from a key European financial authority regarding the application of the landmark Markets in Crypto Assets (MiCA) regulation. This clarification specifically addresses the status of two of the largest cryptocurrencies by market capitalization: Bitcoin and Ethereum. For those navigating the complexities of crypto regulation Europe , this insight from the Central Bank of Ireland is particularly relevant. Understanding the Core of MiCA Regulation Before diving into the specifics of Bitcoin and Ethereum’s status, it’s essential to grasp what MiCA regulation is and why it’s so important. MiCA is a comprehensive regulatory framework established by the European Union. Its primary goals are to: Provide legal certainty for crypto assets not covered by existing EU financial services legislation. Support innovation while ensuring financial stability and protecting investors and consumers. Establish harmonized rules for crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) across the EU. Address risks related to market integrity and financial stability that could arise from crypto assets. MiCA covers a broad range of crypto assets and activities, but its scope is defined by specific categories of crypto assets and the services provided in relation to them. This is where the detail matters, particularly concerning the requirement of an ‘identifiable issuer’. Central Bank Ireland Crypto Stance: No Issuer, No MiCA? The recent statement causing discussion comes from Mary-Elizabeth McMunn, the Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Ireland. According to reports, she indicated that both Bitcoin (BTC) and Ethereum (ETH) are currently not subject to the MiCA regulation because they lack an identifiable issuer. This point is crucial. MiCA’s framework largely applies to crypto assets that are issued by a specific entity or group, making that entity accountable for compliance, disclosure, and other requirements. Think of it this way: For many traditional financial instruments, there’s a clear issuer – a company issuing shares, a government issuing bonds, a bank issuing stablecoins (which MiCA does cover under specific categories). This issuer is responsible for meeting regulatory obligations. Bitcoin and Ethereum, however, were launched in a decentralized manner, with no single company, foundation (in the traditional sense), or individual entity acting as a central issuer responsible for their ongoing existence or issuance in the way MiCA defines it. Why the ‘MiCA Issuer’ Point is Key for Bitcoin and Ethereum The distinction regarding the MiCA issuer is fundamental to how the regulation classifies crypto assets. MiCA broadly categorizes crypto assets into: Crypto-assets other than asset-referenced tokens or e-money tokens: This is a broad category, but the issuer requirements still apply for many sub-types. Asset-referenced tokens (ARTs): Crypto assets that purport to maintain a stable value by referencing another value or right, or a combination thereof, including one or more official currencies. E-money tokens (EMTs): Crypto assets that purport to maintain a stable value by referencing the value of one official currency. The requirements for issuing and offering ARTs and EMTs are particularly stringent under MiCA, placing significant obligations on the issuer. For crypto assets that don’t fit neatly into ART or EMT categories, the application of MiCA often still hinges on there being an identifiable entity responsible for the public offering or admission to trading. Because Bitcoin and the original Ether issuance model predate much of this regulatory thinking and operate on decentralized networks without a central issuing authority, they arguably fall outside the direct scope of MiCA’s issuer-centric provisions. This is the basis for the Central Bank of Ireland’s Deputy Governor’s statement on Bitcoin Ethereum MiCA status. Contrasting with Tokens Having an Identifiable Issuer: The XRP Example The original report mentioned a comment from crypto influencer “SMQKE” highlighting XRP as an example of a token that *does* have an identifiable issuer (Ripple Labs). This comparison helps underscore the point made by the Central Bank of Ireland. If a crypto asset has a clear entity responsible for its creation, distribution, and potentially ongoing development or management in a centralized manner, it is far more likely to be considered within MiCA’s scope, potentially as a utility token (depending on its function) or another regulated category if it references assets or fiat. This contrast illustrates the regulatory challenge posed by the diverse nature of crypto assets. Regulators are attempting to fit novel digital assets into frameworks often designed for traditional finance, where identifiable issuers and responsible entities are standard. The decentralized nature of networks like Bitcoin and Ethereum presents a unique case that requires careful interpretation of regulations like MiCA. What Does This Mean for Crypto Regulation in Europe? The stance from the Central Bank Ireland crypto position offers valuable insight into how national regulators within the EU are interpreting MiCA. While MiCA is an EU-wide regulation, its application and enforcement will involve national competent authorities. This statement suggests that, at least from the perspective of the Irish central bank, the decentralized nature of BTC and ETH places them outside the primary issuance and offering rules of MiCA. This doesn’t mean Bitcoin and Ethereum are entirely unregulated in Europe. Activities involving these assets, such as trading services provided by crypto-asset service providers (CASPs), *are* covered by MiCA. CASPs dealing with BTC, ETH, or any other crypto asset must comply with MiCA’s requirements regarding authorization, governance, consumer protection, market abuse prevention, and more. So, while the assets themselves might not be regulated at the ‘issuer’ level, the businesses that interact with them on behalf of users within the EU *are* subject to comprehensive rules under MiCA. This is a critical distinction. Potential Implications and Benefits of this Clarity For the crypto industry and users in Europe, this clarification, particularly regarding the Bitcoin Ethereum MiCA relationship, offers several potential benefits: Increased Certainty: Reduces ambiguity around the regulatory status of the two largest cryptocurrencies, which are foundational to the broader crypto market. Focus on Services: Reinforces that MiCA’s focus for decentralized assets is on regulating the *services* provided around them (exchanges, wallets, etc.), rather than attempting to regulate the decentralized protocols themselves. Potential for Innovation: By acknowledging the unique structure of truly decentralized networks, this interpretation might provide more space for innovation at the protocol layer, while ensuring consumer protection occurs at the service provider layer. However, this interpretation isn’t without its nuances and potential future considerations. For instance, the status of Ethereum post-merge and its move to Proof-of-Stake, including staking services, is an area that continues to be discussed within regulatory circles. While the core ETH asset may not have a central issuer, services built around staking could potentially have different regulatory considerations. Challenges and Remaining Questions for Crypto Regulation Europe While the Central Bank Ireland crypto statement provides clarity on one aspect, the broader landscape of crypto regulation Europe still presents challenges: Defining ‘Decentralized’: Where is the line drawn between a truly decentralized network and one with enough central control to constitute an ‘issuer’? This will likely be a point of ongoing regulatory scrutiny for newer or less decentralized projects. Scope of Services: As decentralized finance (DeFi) evolves, determining which activities constitute regulated ‘services’ under MiCA and who is responsible for compliance becomes complex. Harmonization in Practice: While MiCA aims for harmonization, interpretations by national authorities, though guided by the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA) and European Banking Authority (EBA), might still vary in practice. Future Developments: The crypto space is dynamic. New types of assets and services may require future regulatory adjustments or interpretations. Understanding these complexities is vital for anyone operating or investing in the European crypto market. The focus is clearly shifting towards regulating the gateways and service providers that connect users to the decentralized world, rather than attempting to police the decentralized protocols themselves, especially those lacking a clear MiCA issuer . Actionable Insights for the Crypto Community Based on this significant clarification and the broader scope of MiCA, here are some actionable insights: For Users: Be aware that while BTC and ETH might not be directly regulated at the protocol level under MiCA, the platforms and wallets you use to buy, sell, or store them within the EU are likely regulated. Choose CASPs that are transparent about their compliance status. For Businesses (CASPs): MiCA compliance is non-negotiable if you operate in the EU. Focus on meeting the stringent requirements for authorization, governance, risk management, and consumer protection, regardless of whether the underlying assets you handle (like BTC or ETH) have an issuer or not. For Project Teams (Developing New Assets): If your project involves issuing a new token, carefully consider whether it falls under MiCA’s definitions, particularly ARTs or EMTs, or if it could be considered to have an identifiable issuer. Seek legal and regulatory advice early in your development process if you intend to target the EU market. Stay Informed: Regulatory interpretations can evolve. Follow updates from EU authorities (ESMA, EBA) and national regulators like the Central Bank of Ireland to stay abreast of developments impacting MiCA regulation and crypto regulation Europe . Summary: A Step Towards Clarity in European Crypto Regulation The statement from the Central Bank of Ireland’s Deputy Governor, Mary-Elizabeth McMunn, provides welcome clarity on a specific but crucial aspect of the MiCA regulation: that Bitcoin and Ethereum, due to their lack of an identifiable issuer, are not subject to the issuance and offering requirements of the framework. This aligns with the decentralized nature of these pioneering networks and reinforces the idea that MiCA’s focus, for such assets, is primarily on regulating the service providers that facilitate access for users. While challenges and questions remain in the complex world of crypto regulation Europe , this interpretation from the Central Bank Ireland crypto stance marks a significant step in understanding the practical application of MiCA and the importance of the MiCA issuer concept in determining regulatory scope, particularly concerning the status of Bitcoin Ethereum MiCA interactions. To learn more about the latest crypto market trends, explore our article on key developments shaping Bitcoin price action. This post MiCA Regulation: Crucial Clarity from Central Bank of Ireland on Bitcoin, Ethereum first appeared on BitcoinWorld and is written by Editorial Team
A woman in Pennsylvania is accused of abusing family ties to steal large sums of cash from her mother’s PNC bank account for personal use. Grove City Police just arrested 55-year-old Lynn Dewey following a bank fraud investigation, reports 21 WFMJ. According to the criminal complaint, the senior care provider Quality Life Services contacted authorities after Dewey’s 80-year-old mother, who is unable to care for herself and make financial decisions, lost a substantial amount in her bank account. The facility’s administrators say that the bank statements from December 2023 to present show that Dewey, who had access to the account, transferred funds using the peer-to-peer money transfer service Cash App. They also say that the mother has over $16,000 in patient liability, with no payments made since January. Medicaid likewise denied medical assistance due to the old woman’s reported income. The police say that the suspect admitted using Cash App to move money from the PNC bank account and used the funds to purchase groceries and gas, pay personal credit card bills and send money to relatives. Dewey says she used $41,671.78 for personal expenses. She is now facing charges for financial exploitation of an older adult and theft. Follow us on X , Facebook and Telegram Don't Miss a Beat – Subscribe to get email alerts delivered directly to your inbox Check Price Action Surf The Daily Hodl Mix Disclaimer: Opinions expressed at The Daily Hodl are not investment advice. Investors should do their due diligence before making any high-risk investments in Bitcoin, cryptocurrency or digital assets. Please be advised that your transfers and trades are at your own risk, and any losses you may incur are your responsibility. The Daily Hodl does not recommend the buying or selling of any cryptocurrencies or digital assets, nor is The Daily Hodl an investment advisor. Please note that The Daily Hodl participates in affiliate marketing. Generated Image: Midjourney The post $41,000 Drained From Woman’s PNC Bank Account – And Her Daughter Is Now a Suspect: Report appeared first on The Daily Hodl .
BlackRock purchases $357M in crypto as Ethereum whales accumulate and Bitcoin whales shift to profit-taking.
Public companies now hold 809,100 BTC, marking a sharp increase from 312,200 BTC last year. Trump’s pro-crypto policies and U.S. regulatory changes fuel increased Bitcoin holdings. FASB’s new rules allowing Bitcoin gains to be recognized boost corporate investment in BTC. A growing number of companies are holding BTC, with 116 public companies owning approximately 809,100 BTC , equivalent to around $85 billion. This is a considerable rise from just 312,200 BTC a year earlier. The reason for the major increase in Bitcoin accumulation is due to various factors. The recent surge in Bitcoin’s value has prompted many more companies to include it in their portfolios. The ongoing support for cryptocurrency by President Donald Trump has created more interest in the sector. After Trump was elected, the U.S. government began to support policies that are beneficial for the crypto industry. For instance, the SEC has stopped pursuing many lawsuits against leading crypto firms. The Trump administration has also established a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and a Digital Asset Stockpile, demonstrating its support for Bitcoin. Trump’s Win and FASB Rules Boost Corpora… The post Corporate Bitcoin Holdings Surge to $85 Billion: What’s Fueling the Growth? appeared first on Coin Edition .
A significant Ethereum token transfer worth $159 million has sparked intrigue within the crypto community amid a bearish market phase. The transaction involved 61,966 ETH moved between unknown wallets, raising