The next crypto to explode just received a signal from the largest venture firm in crypto. On May 5, CoinDesk reported that Andreessen Horowitz raised a $2.2 billion fund and declared crypto fundamentals at an all-time high. When the firm that backed Coinbase and Solana puts $2.2 billion into a fresh fund, capital flowing into early-stage projects grows fast.

That confidence pushed risk appetite higher. But large-cap meme tokens cannot give you the return a presale delivers before any listing. Pepeto raised $9.89 million from wallets that tested every live product, and the Binance listing gets closer each day.

Andreessen Horowitz closed its new crypto fund at $2.2 billion on May 5, per CoinDesk, its largest raise since 2022. Haun Ventures closed at $1 billion in the same period, showing institutional capital flowing back at scale.

Pepe (PEPE) trades at $0.0000041, sitting 85% below its all-time high per CoinMarketCap. Shiba Inu (SHIB) holds $0.000006336, down 93% from its peak. When top venture firms raise billions with this conviction, the next crypto to explode is the one at presale pricing before that wave arrives.

Three Tokens Competing for the Next Crypto to Explode Title

Pepeto: Why $9.89 Million in Capital Shows Exactly Where Serious Money Moved

The reason a presale beats recovery tokens like PEPE and SHIB for returns comes down to where you get in. Speed decides everything in crypto, and if you are switching between separate apps to bridge, swap, and scan a token, the opportunity closes.

Pepeto, considered the next crypto to explode, puts every tool on one platform so you can move before the market catches up.

The team shipped PepetoSwap for instant cross-chain swaps, the Pepeto Bridge for free transfers, and a full exchange with a token scanner that reviews every contract before your capital gets near it. Every product is live. The presale collected $9.89 million at $0.0000001868, every contract cleared SolidProof and Coinsult audits, and 175% APY staking grows positions daily. The person who created Pepe’s $11 billion run leads this build, and an ex-Binance executive who managed listings sits on the team.

This type of presale shows up once per cycle and rewards the wallets that committed while everyone else was still reading. The Binance listing hits in days, and once it opens this entry is gone. Entering now through the Pepeto official website is how those early returns get locked.

Pepe (PEPE) Price at $0.0000041 as Canary Capital PEPE ETF Filing Keeps Institutional Interest Alive

Pepe (PEPE) trades at $0.0000041 per CoinMarketCap, up 1.5% in 24 hours but sitting 85% below its $0.00002803 all-time high. Canary Capital filed an S-1 for the first U.S. spot PEPE ETF in April, and whale wallets added large positions during the dip.

The $1.66 billion cap needs a full meme rotation just to recover. Even a push to $0.000010 gives roughly 2.5x over months, and that distance cannot compete with what the next crypto to explode at presale pricing delivers from a single listing.

Shiba Inu (SHIB) Price at $0.000006336 as Burn Rate Rises but Recovery Stays Slow

Shiba Inu (SHIB) trades at $0.000006336 per CoinMarketCap, up 2.13% and 93% below its all-time high. Shibarium transactions keep growing after network upgrades, and the burn rate increased during the past month, but burn amounts remain small relative to 589 trillion circulating supply.

Analyst targets for 2026 sit near $0.000010, roughly 1.6x from here per Changelly. Wallets chasing the next breakout need presale distance, not a heavy-cap recovery trapped under its own supply.

Conclusion

Andreessen Horowitz just put $2.2 billion behind crypto fundamentals being at an all-time high, and yet PEPE and SHIB sit 85% and 93% below their peaks with 2x to 3x as the ceiling this year. The big money is coming back, but it is not going to rescue heavy-cap meme tokens stuck under their own weight. Pepeto at $0.0000001868 already has $9.89 million inside from wallets that ran the numbers, and those wallets compound at 175% APY every day.

The rounds fill faster now because the Binance listing is close and $0.0000001868 will not exist once trading starts. The wallets that entered SHIB and PEPE before their listings turned small amounts into life-changing money, and Pepeto carries that setup at a price that makes the return math even bigger. Entering now through the Pepeto official website is how those returns get built before the listing opens.

Click To Visit Pepeto Website To Enter The Presale

FAQs

What is the next crypto to explode in May 2026?

Pepeto leads as the next crypto to explode with a live exchange, cross-chain bridge, and contract scanner shipped before listing day. The presale raised $9.89 million at $0.0000001868 with the Pepe co-founder and dual SolidProof plus Coinsult audits behind it.

Is Pepe (PEPE) at $0.0000041 a strong entry after the Canary Capital ETF filing?

Pepe (PEPE) holds $0.0000041 with whale accumulation and a pending spot ETF at the SEC. Support sits near $0.0000039, with $0.0000050 as next resistance.

Disclaimer: This is a Press Release provided by a third party who is responsible for the content. Please conduct your own research before taking any action based on the content.

Ether has struggled to sustain momentum above the $2,400 mark for a three-month stretch, underscoring a stubborn disconnect between the broader crypto market rebound and the leading smart-contract platform’s price action. With ETH down about 21% so far in 2026, traders and developers alike are parsing the drivers of weakness beyond simple risk-off sentiment, including shrinking on-chain activity and softer decentralized application (DApp) economics. The momentum gap is reflected in the broader market as well: total crypto market capitalization is down around 11% year-to-date, signaling persistent headwinds for Ethereum’s vast ecosystem despite the ongoing appeal of layer-2 solutions and scaling upgrades.

Key takeaways

• Ether has not held above $2,400 for three months and is about 21% lower in 2026, signaling a broader investment hesitation around ETH’s price path despite a broader market rebound.
• Decentralized exchange volumes declined by 53% over six months, while DApp revenue fell roughly 49% in the same period, contributing to weaker ETH price formation.
• Hacks and security incidents in April totaled about $630 million, with KelpDAO and Drift Protocol responsible for the majority of losses; Hacken attributes the attacks to actors linked to the DPRK.
• Competition among chains and the scaling narrative remain in flux: Ethereum still dominates the ecosystem, but rivals and cross-chain activity have carved out meaningful DApp revenue shares, aided by base-layer scalability and rollups discussions.
• Institutional sentiment around ETH remains cautious as Bitmine, the largest publicly listed ETH holder, sits underwater on its reserves, reducing the perceived incentive for large-scale institutional exposure.

Ether’s price action and the on-chain backdrop

Market data collected over the past quarter show Ether’s gradual loss of upside momentum even as the broader crypto market recovers from earlier declines. After repeatedly failing to close above $2,400, ETH’s year-to-date performance remains tepid, with a notable divergence from other major assets that have benefited from renewed risk appetite in parts of the sector. On-chain activity, a traditional proxy for network usage and demand, has shown signs of softening, a dynamic that often precedes slower price appreciation for the asset itself.

Analysts point to a combination of factors weighing on ETH’s price formation. The decline in DApp activity—particularly on decentralized exchanges (DEX) and other on-chain services—has translated into lower throughput demand and, consequently, muted fee generation for the base layer and its ecosystem. While Ethereum’s lead over competitors remains clear in aggregate metrics, continued shifts in user behavior toward higher-efficiency L2 solutions and cross-chain activity have kept some market participants cautious about sustained upside in the near term.

Hacks and the toll on DApp economics

Security incidents across the crypto industry have punctured confidence in on-chain activity, with April recording approximately $630 million in losses from hacks. Among the most consequential incidents were those tied to KelpDAO and Drift Protocol, which together accounted for a substantial share of the month’s total. Hackers linked to the Democratic People’s Republic of Korea (DPRK) were named by security firm Hacken as offenders, underscoring the ongoing geopolitical dimension of crypto security risks.

The ripples from these incidents extended beyond isolated losses. Defi analytics indicate a near-term drag on DEX activity, which directly influences DApp revenue generation. In three months, aggregate DEX activity declined by roughly 47%, while revenue across DApps fell about 49%. The correlation is intuitive: fewer trades and reduced user engagement on on-chain platforms translate into lower fee pools and diminished incentives for developers to build or sustain high-activity products.

Shifting landscape: competition, scaling, and the DApp revenue mix

Even as Ethereum remains the leading backbone for decentralized finance, any meaningful adoption shift affects the competitive balance. Data from DefiLlama show that while Ethereum remains dominant, other ecosystems have captured meaningful slices of DApp revenue. In particular, Solana and a project referred to as Hyperliquid together account for roughly 42% of DApp revenue among non-Ethereum ecosystems. This is notable given Ethereum’s much larger total value locked, highlighting how scale does not automatically translate into undisputed market leadership in every segment of the DApp economy.

Industry observers have long debated how scaling upgrades will influence demand for base-layer capacity versus L2 rollups. Some market participants argued that a robust scaling upgrade could reduce the immediate need for layer-2 solutions, potentially compressing the fee-rich value proposition that drives staking rewards and on-chain revenue. Others maintain that a richer base layer could feed higher throughput and attract more sophisticated DApps, sustaining a healthy revenue loop. Uttam Singh, an engineer at Alchemy, has noted that market expectations around Ethereum’s scaling roadmap include the potential for increased base-layer capacity and more efficient data handling, which could influence how clients pre-fetch block data and how parallel transaction execution might unfold. The debate continues as the ecosystem weighs whether higher capacity will translate into higher or more stable on-chain fees over time.

Institutional sentiment and the Bitmine overlay

Institutional demand for ETH remains cautious amid ongoing balance-sheet considerations for large holders. Bitmine (BMNR US), the largest publicly listed ETH holder, reported a sizeable unrealized loss position as its corporate reserves remain underwater. The company’s ETH holdings were acquired at a high cost basis, and the current valuation leaves exposure without an immediate liquidation risk; however, the underperformance relative to cost basis dampens the perceived appeal of ETH for some institutional investors. This dynamic complicates the narrative around a rapid institutional-led price rebound, even as Ethereum’s technology and ecosystem continue to attract builders and users.

Colocation of these factors—soft on-chain activity, a hardened cybersecurity backdrop, and a still-mixed institutional sentiment—helps explain why ETH has lagged the broader market recovery. The picture is not a wholesale rejection of Ethereum’s long-term potential, but it does indicate that near-term upside will likely hinge on a combination of improved on-chain economics, continued scaling progress, and a clearer path to higher user engagement with DApps and cross-chain services.

What to watch next

Investors and developers should monitor several evolving dynamics. First, the trajectory of DEX volumes and DApp revenue in the coming quarters will be a bellwether for on-chain activity and fee generation, influencing incentives for staking and network security. Second, the security landscape remains a critical risk factor; even a single high-profile breach can ripple through user behavior and liquidity provision. Third, the scaling roadmap and the adoption of L2 solutions or cross-chain architectures will shape how demand for base-layer capacity evolves and how Ethereum competes for developer mindshare in a rapidly innovating ecosystem. Finally, institutional exposure to ETH will continue to depend on macro conditions, the health of largest holders’ balance sheets, and the perceived durability of ETH’s long-term value proposition beyond price momentum. Readers should stay tuned for further data releases from DefiLlama and security analyses that illuminate the evolving risk and opportunity in Ethereum’s ecosystem.

Erik Reppel said at Consensus Miami 2026 that AI agents bypass internet ads entirely, threatening the web’s core business model and pointing to x402 stablecoin micropayments as the structural replacement.

Coinbase Developer Platform head and x402 founder Erik Reppel took the Consensus Miami 2026 stage on Wednesday to argue that autonomous AI agents will collapse the advertising model that has funded the web for three decades. His argument is structural: the internet was built for humans clicking links and seeing ads, not for software interacting directly with other software.

“I think the thing people haven’t quite realized is that we’re going to break the fundamental economic model of the internet,” Reppel said in an interview. “Moving from browsers and you visiting the website of the person who’s publishing content, to consuming things through your agents and your chat interface.” He added: “Agents really are the browser of the future.”

The x402 replacement

Reppel pointed to x402 as the fix. The open protocol embeds stablecoin micropayments directly into the HTTP layer so AI agents can automatically pay for content, data, and APIs, replacing the ad impression that human browsing generates.

He estimated the agentic economy could grow to between $3 trillion and $5 trillion by 2030, citing that as the scale of disruption facing the current ad-funded model.

The infrastructure argument has real backing. As crypto.news documented, Cloudflare processes a billion HTTP 402 “payment required” responses per day on its network and is co-developing x402 alongside Coinbase. Cloudflare has noted that more than half of all internet traffic is now non-human, with AI scrapers visiting sites tens of thousands of times for every human visitor they return.

For Reppel, that imbalance is not a trend to manage but a structural break that makes ad-funded content economically unsustainable. x402, in his framing, is not a product but a new payment layer for a web that was never designed to be paid for by machines.

CME Group plans to launch Bitcoin Volatility futures on June 1, pending regulatory review, giving investors a compliant way to trade expected Bitcoin volatility rather than price direction, according to a company release published Tuesday.

The Chicago-based derivatives marketplace said the contracts will settle to the CME CF Bitcoin Volatility Index, a 30-day measure of expected Bitcoin volatility derived from CME options markets.

CME describes the new contracts as Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC)-regulated futures aimed specifically at Bitcoin volatility, extending the existing US regulatory framework that already covers CME’s Bitcoin and Ether derivatives.

Giovanni Vicioso, CME Group’s global head of cryptocurrency products, said in the release that market participants are seeking regulated products that offer exposure to market moves, and that the new futures would let traders invest in or hedge against future Bitcoin volatility.

The launch would give institutions a regulated way to trade Bitcoin volatility in the US directly through CME’s clearing framework, rather than building similar exposure through combinations of Bitcoin options and futures or using offshore venues.

Related: CME CEO Duffy says exchange is exploring issuing its own token

In the same release, Morgan Stanley managing director and head of derivatives sales David Schlageter said the contracts should help market participants manage portfolio risk by trading volatility itself.

CME Group to Launch Bitcoin Volatility Futures Contracts. Source: PR Newswire.

CME described the contracts as the “first-of-their-kind regulated futures contracts,” distinguishing them from existing crypto-native volatility products offered outside the US-regulated futures framework.

Cointelegraph reached out to CME for additional comment, but had not received a response by publication.

CME’s product keeps Bitcoin volatility trading onshore

Similar products exist elsewhere. Deribit launched BTC DVOL futures in March 2023, tied to its implied-volatility index, while BitMEX introduced its BVOL 30-day historical volatility futures back in January 2015.

CME first introduced cash-settled Bitcoin futures in December 2017 and has since expanded its regulated crypto lineup to include Bitcoin options, Micro Bitcoin futures and options, Ether futures and options and other cryptocurrency contracts.

The group is preparing to move its cryptocurrency futures and options to 24/7 trading from May 29, subject to regulatory review, further aligning its market structure with the always-on nature of digital assets.

That push comes as crypto derivatives continue to dominate trading activity more broadly, with a CoinGlass report estimating 2025 crypto derivatives volume at about $85.7 trillion, and Swiss bank Amina Group finding that derivatives account for roughly three-quarters of all crypto trading.

Magazine: Bitcoin will not hit $1M by 2030, says veteran trader Peter Brandt

Wall Street bank JPMorgan and credit card giant Mastercard said they have completed the first cross-border, cross-bank redemption of a tokenized US Treasury fund, working with Ripple’s XRP Ledger and interbank settlement rails.

The pilot transaction involved blockchain tokenization platform Ondo Finance redeeming the US Ondo Short-Term US Government Treasuries (OUSG) fund for Ripple on the XRP Ledger. Mastercard’s Multi-Token Network then routed the settlement instructions for JPMorgan’s blockchain platform, Kinexys, to deliver US dollars to Ripple’s Singapore bank account.

“For the first time, a public blockchain and global banking infrastructure settled a cross-border transaction of a tokenized fund together in real time,” Ondo Finance said Wednesday.

Source: Ben Grossman

The pilot reflects growing collaboration between crypto firms and TradFi institutions seeking to build faster, lower-cost, global payment and settlement systems that run outside of traditional banking hours.

The pilot involving OUSG builds on an earlier one in which JPMorgan and Ondo Finance participated in May 2025, when the tokenized US Treasury fund was moved across a public and permissioned blockchain network. 

Real-world asset tokenization has drawn growing interest from Wall Street leaders, who envision tokenizing everything from stocks and bonds to money market funds and real estate. 

More than $31.1 billion worth of real-world assets, excluding stablecoins, is currently tokenized onchain, according to RWA.xyz data. Boston Consulting Group estimated in 2022 that the tokenization market could rise to $16 trillion by 2030, while McKinsey & Co. said it could reach a more conservative $2 trillion over the same time frame. 

Related: Stablecoins behave like FX markets as liquidity splits: Eco CEO 

The New York Stock Exchange’s parent, Intercontinental Exchange, announced in January that it would launch a tokenization platform for 24/7 trading and instant settlement of stocks and exchange-traded funds using a blockchain post-trade system, marking one of the biggest developments in the tokenization space to date.

Tokenization needs regulation before widespread adoption

Despite the developments, the International Monetary Fund flagged several concerns in an April report, including that tokenization shifts risk from the banking system to shared ledgers and smart contract code, making it more difficult to intervene during “stress events.” 

The IMF added that without legal clarity over ownership records and settlement finality, tokenized markets risk being “fragmented and peripheral.” 

Shark Tank investor Kevin O’Leary aired these concerns on Wednesday at Consensus Miami 2026, saying that significant capital will not be tokenized until crypto market structure legislation is passed in the US and is compliant with Securities and Exchange Commission rules.

“When that occurs, it’s going to change everything,” O’Leary said at the conference.

Magazine: North Korea denies crypto hacks, Upbit’s bank tests Ripple: Asia Express

Hut 8 (HUT) shares surged nearly 30% Wednesday as the company announced a 15-year, $9.8 billion lease tied to a large-scale AI data center project in Texas. Hut 8 also said the lease structure includes options that could increase total contract value to about $25.1 billion if all renewal terms are exercised.

The Beacoin Point campus was originally intended for bitcoin BTC$82,164.36 mining but was repositioned for AI infrastructure as demand for high-performance computing capacity accelerated, Hut 8 said.

The company’s pivot comes at a time when publicly listed bitcoin miners face increasingly challenging economics as they face losses of approximately $19,000 per coin produced, and are rapidly pivoting toward artificial intelligence and high-performance computing infrastructure. More than $70 billion contracts have been signed, and some miners could derive up to 70% of their revenue from AI by the end of 2026

Hut 8 said it has commercialized the first phase of its Beacon Point campus in Nueces County through a 352-megawatt (MW) IT capacity lease with a high-investment-gerade tenant. The agreement supports AI training and inference workloads and marks Hut 8’s second major AI data center deal.

The lease brings hut 8’s total contracted AI data center capacity to 597 MW, with aggregate base-term contract value reaching about $16.8 billion. The company said it expects the Beacon Point lease to contribute roughly %655 billion in annual net operating income once stabilized.

Hut 8 said the new funding stream will support its AI infrastructure platform, including development of additional capacity at Beacon Point and growth across its broader pipeline. The campus has secured 1,000 MW of utility capacity, with initial energization expected in Q1 2027.

“Beacon Point underscores why we start with power and maintain flexibility across end markets,” said Chief Executive Asher Genoot. “Operating across multiple applications lets us underwrite assets that single-use-case developers cannot, then redirect them toward higher-value commercialization pathways as demand evolves.”

The company said the project is designed to NVIDIA’s DSX reference architecture and will be developed with partners including American Electric Power, Vertiv and Jacobs. Initial delivery of the first data hall is expected by Q3 2027, it added.

Cryptocurrency exchange Coinbase was sued in California federal court over frozen crypto allegedly tied to a $55 million DAI phishing theft from August 2024.

The complaint, filed Monday in a San Francisco federal court, alleges that after laundering the proceeds through crypto mixer Tornado Cash, the attacker deposited part of the “traceable stolen funds” into a Coinbase retail user account, where the funds remain frozen. 

The Puerto Rico-based plaintiff is asking the court to declare him the rightful owner of the frozen assets and order Coinbase to return them. The lawsuit also names an unknown John Doe defendant accused of carrying out the theft.

The lawsuit questions the responsibility of cryptocurrency exchanges in handling stolen funds that were traceably sent to these platforms after an exploit. The complaint claims that Coinbase has “acknowledged” that it holds these traced funds and has “indicated that a court order adjudicating ownership is required before it will release the frozen assets.”

The case highlights a problem in crypto theft recovery where exchanges may freeze suspected stolen funds after receiving alerts, but often require a court order before releasing assets to a claimant.

The lawsuit comes nearly two years after an exploiter stole $55 million in Dai stablecoins through a sophisticated phishing attack that deceived the victim into clicking a malicious link to a fraudulent DeFi Saver login, authorizing the attacker to gain access to his account and wallets.

Cointelegraph has reached out to Coinbase for more details surrounding the stolen funds and the path towards user recovery.

Coinbase sued for funds linked to the $55 million DeFi Saver hack. Source: CourtListener

Crypto wallet drainer was used to facilitate $55 million exploit

The $55 million exploit was carried out using the malicious Inferno Drainer platform, which offers a scam-as-a-service malware for malicious actors seeking to facilitate digital asset theft without the need to exploit code-level protocol vulnerabilities.

In addition to notifying law enforcement, the victim contracted crypto analytics platforms Zero Shadow and Five Stones intelligence to trace the stolen crypto. The companies found evidence linking the laundering of the funds to Ukrainian citizen Okelsiy Oleksandrovych Gorelikhin.

On Nov. 30, 2024, Zero Shadow notified Coinbase that stolen funds linked to the theft had been deposited into a Coinbase address, asking the exchange to conduct due diligence and freeze the assets.

On Dec. 2, 2024, Coinbase confirmed that the address belongs to a Coinbase retail user and that it implemented “friction measures” preventing dissipation of those funds pending investigation.

The court filing argued that the stolen cryptocurrency held in the Coinbase account was “identifiable property traceable to Plaintiff’s stolen assets” and added that the defendant had previously demanded the return of the assets.

Related: Arbitrum voters consider $71M ETH release for Kelp recovery

The year 2024 was a breakout year for scam-as-a-service tools, with usage of Inferno Drainer tripling in the first half of the year, rising from roughly 800 malicious decentralized applications created at the start of the year to over 2,400 by the end of it, according to blockchain security firm Blockaid.

Magazine: AI-driven hacks could kill DeFi — unless projects act now

U.S. prosecutors have become increasingly aggressive in freezing digital assets believed to be traceable to illicit activities such as money laundering, “pig butchering” schemes, sanctions violations, and other financial crimes. Digital asset freezes take on a new dimension, however, when the freeze is voluntarily initiated by the issuer at the government’s request, bypassing the legal protections of a traditional asset seizure. In such instances, digital asset holders are often caught off guard, unaware that their funds are allegedly tainted and suddenly deprived of access to assets or income acquired through legitimate means.

Traditional asset seizures

In traditional financial crime investigations, the federal government’s authority to restrain or seize assets is governed by established legal and constitutional safeguards. Law enforcement typically must demonstrate a connection between the property and alleged criminal activity and obtain judicial authorization, such as a seizure warrant, before restricting access to those assets.

Seized assets are then subject to the federal forfeiture regime, which operates through overlapping authorities, including civil forfeiture under 18 U.S.C. §§ 981 and 983, and criminal forfeiture under 18 U.S.C. § 982.

Digital asset blacklisting

Voluntary digital asset freezes represent a departure from traditional seizure processes. Rather than obtaining judicial authorization, law enforcement may request that an issuer freeze or blacklist specific wallet addresses. This practice has been reinforced by the GENIUS Act, which requires stablecoin issuers to maintain the technical capability to freeze, burn, or otherwise restrict tokens to comply with law enforcement directives.

For affected digital asset holders, recourse through the stablecoin or other digital asset issuer is often limited because those issuers generally defer to the requesting government agency and do not know the underlying basis for the freeze. As a result, individuals and entities whose assets have been frozen typically must engage directly with the relevant governmental authority to seek relief.

These challenges are compounded by two defining features of blockchain systems: pseudonymity and traceability. While wallet addresses do not inherently reveal the identity of their owners, blockchain transactions are publicly visible and can be traced across multiple transfers absent the use of mixers or other privacy-enhancing services. Law enforcement agencies thus routinely use blockchain forensic tools to follow the movement of funds originating from wallets suspected of involvement in illicit activity.

At the same time, tracing funds across a decentralized network introduces significant uncertainty due to wallet pseudonymity. Although investigators may identify an initial source of illicit activity, they are often unable or choose not to expend the resources required to differentiate between downstream wallets controlled by individuals who are involved in the criminal scheme and those controlled by innocent bystanders who have unwittingly received the allegedly tainted funds.

In our experience – including the successful unlocking of tens of millions of dollars in wrongfully frozen funds – it is not enough to point to the number of transactions, or “hops,” between the upstream illicit activity and the downstream frozen wallet. Government agencies will instead seek to understand how and why the funds were acquired and demand contemporaneous documentary evidence of the legitimacy of the transactions – unfairly but unmistakably shifting the burden of proof from the investigating agency to the digital asset holder whose funds have been frozen.

Simply put, U.S. law enforcement’s approach is to freeze first, and ask questions later – and then to require owners of the frozen digital assets to prove their innocence to get their funds back. This tactic, combined with U.S. law enforcement’s expansive view of U.S. jurisdiction, puts all holders of stablecoins or other digital assets anywhere in the world at risk, whether they unwittingly acquired the assets five, 10, or even 20 hops downstream from illicit activity.

Practical tips for stablecoin issuers and those affected by stablecoin freezes

Notwithstanding the challenges involved, participants on both sides of governmental digital asset freeze requests – both issuers and holders – retain a variety of ways to protect themselves:

Individuals and entities affected by digital asset freezes

When a wallet is frozen, the window to respond effectively can be narrow, and early missteps can be difficult to unwind. To minimize these risks, we recommend digital asset holders:

• Engage counsel with experience not only in criminal defense and engaging with governmental agencies, but also specifically in digital asset matters, digital asset transactions and tracing.
• Assemble a clear factual record: how the funds were acquired, the purpose of the transactions, and any due diligence performed on counterparties. For entities, this should also include relevant internal policies governing digital asset use. The objective is to present a coherent and well-supported account demonstrating that the funds were obtained and used for legitimate purposes, without knowledge of any underlying upstream illicit activity.
• Consider a proactive approach. In some cases, it may be advantageous to engage proactively with the government agency responsible for the freeze, rather than waiting for further action. Early engagement, if carefully handled, can help shape the narrative before the government’s speculative assumptions solidify into hardened narratives.
• And of course, exercise caution. Communications with issuers or investigators may carry legal consequences, and statements made without a full understanding of the facts or legal posture can complicate efforts to secure the release of funds.

Digital asset issuers

To reduce exposure to civil litigation by users who believe their assets have been improperly frozen, digital asset issuers can:

• Adopt clear, consistent procedures when responding to governmental freeze requests, including how and whether issuers respond to user requests for information.
• Maintain an internal policy governing when and how such requests are honored, particularly where the request is not supported by a court order or other compulsory process.
• Make clear in the user terms of service or other documentation that the issuer complies with governmental freeze requests, including those that are not accompanied by a court order or other compulsory process if applicable.
• Maintain a record of all communications with governmental agencies or users in connection with specific freeze requests, and the basis for effecting the freeze.