Strategy’s perpetual preferred stock, STRC, the company’s primary vehicle for funding its Bitcoin purchases in 2026, hit a new daily trading volume record of $1.5 billion on Thursday.

“All-time high volume. $1.53B of liquidity,” chairman Michael Saylor said, referring to Strategy’s Variable Rate Series A Perpetual Stretch Preferred Stock. 

Stretch offers investors an 11.5% dividend without requiring the company to dilute common shares. 

Source: Michael Saylor

According to the STRC.live tracker, the company could, in theory, raise an estimated $735.4 million from Thursday’s performance to purchase 9,066 Bitcoin (BTC). 

However, there’s no guarantee that Strategy will make a Bitcoin purchase based on the funds raised by Stretch. 

Strategy has now purchased 56,770 Bitcoin since April and 101,147 Bitcoin since March, accelerating its pace after a slower-than-usual February.

Estimated amount of Bitcoin that Strategy could accumulate from capital raised through STRC on Thursday. Source: STRC.Live

Perpetual preferred stocks have become a popular tool for Bitcoin treasuries to purchase more Bitcoin, particularly during the current bear market, when raising capital via senior convertible notes and at-the-market equity offerings has become more difficult. 

During Strategy’s Q1 earnings call on May 5, Saylor said the company is aiming to build Stretch into the “biggest credit instrument in the world,” while other Bitcoin treasuries have adopted similar strategies.

One of those companies is Strive, which announced on Thursday that investors of its Variable Rate Series A Perpetual Preferred Stock (SATA) would earn daily dividends from June 16, a more frequent payout schedule than the monthly distributions offered by Strategy’s Stretch. 

In recent months, the Tokyo-based Metaplanet has also raised capital to fund Bitcoin purchases through perpetual preferred stocks, such as MARS and MERCURY.

Related: Bitcoin trades at a ‘discount’ on Coinbase: Is a $76K retest next? 

Nearly 200 public companies still hold Bitcoin on their balance sheets.

Strategy remains by far the largest corporate Bitcoin treasury, holding 818,869 Bitcoin worth $66.5 billion at current market prices.

Bitcoin’s recent rally to $81,000 has also pushed above Strategy’s average purchase price of $75,543, putting its Bitcoin holdings up 7.2%. 

Magazine: eToro founder timed Bitcoin top perfectly due to belief in 4 year cycles

Crypto exchange Kraken announced Thursday that it had changed its cross-chain provider from LayerZero to Chainlink’s Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol, joining a number of protocols that have made the move following the Kelp DAO exploit in April.

Kraken said it is deprecating its existing cross-chain provider and migrating to Chainlink CCIP as its exclusive cross-chain infrastructure to secure Kraken Wrapped Bitcoin (kBTC) and all future wrapped tokens.

The company added that it chose Chainlink CCIP because it “offers enterprise-grade infrastructure with strict security and risk management requirements.” These include certifications, secure-by-default design, 16 independent nodes and native rate limits.

LayerZero has been under scrutiny since the Kelp DAO exploit in April, in which about $292 million in liquid restaking tokens were stolen by actors suspected to be linked to North Korea’s Lazarus Group.

LayerZero issued an “overdue apology” on May 9, saying that it had done a “terrible job on comms over the past three weeks.”

It admitted that its internal RPCs (remote procedure calls) were attacked and had their “source of truth poisoned” while its external RPC providers were simultaneously hit with a denial of service attack, but blamed Kelp’s configuration as a direct consequence of their single-DVN (Decentralized Verifier Network) setup.

LayerZero confirmed that no other application had been affected, and more than $9 billion in bridged assets have been moved using the protocol since April 19.

Other protocols migrate away from LayerZero

Kraken is not alone in making the switch. Kelp DAO stated that it is also in the process of migrating to Chainlink’s CCIP, and that it had burned the hacker’s 117,132 rsETH as part of the recovery process this week. 

Related: Kelp DAO eyes reopening withdrawals after rsETH burn

Solv Protocol announced on May 7 that it was migrating from LayerZero to CCIP as its official cross-chain infrastructure for $700 million in tokenized Bitcoin.

Meanwhile, onchain reinsurance protocol Re announced on May 8 that it was migrating its $475 million in total value locked from LayerZero to the Chainlink protocol. 

More than $3 billion in TVL has been migrated to CCIP since the Kelp hack, while numerous protocols have suspended bridging using LayerZero, according to MEXC.

The world’s largest Ethereum liquid staking protocol, Lido, also uses CCIP. “Chainlink’s defense-in-depth model acts as the definitive standard for cross-chain interoperability,” it explained in a blog post on Thursday. 

CCIP and LayerZero comparison. Source: Lido 

No reaction in token prices

There was no reaction in prices for Chainlink’s native token, LINK, which remains at a bear market low of around $10, down 80% from its 2021 peak. 

However, LayerZero’s native token ZRO has declined over 30% since the April hack and is down more than 80% from its 2024 all-time high, according to CoinGecko. 

Cointelegraph reached out to LayerZero for comment but did not receive an immediate response. 

Magazine: eToro founder timed Bitcoin top perfectly due to belief in 4 year cycles

Lombard has joined a wave of protocols switching to Chainlink CCIP as LayerZero migrations top $4 billion.

LayerZero exploit sparks industry-wide migration

The shift accelerated after a $292 million exploit drained 116,500 rsETH from Kelp DAO’s LayerZero-powered bridge in April 2026. LayerZero later said it “made a mistake” by allowing its own verifier network to secure high-value assets in the configuration used.

Kraken announced that it was replacing LayerZero with Chainlink CCIP as the exclusive cross-chain infrastructure for kBTC and all future Kraken wrapped assets. The exchange cited enterprise-grade security, ISO 27001 compliance and SOC 2 Type 2 certification as the reasons for the switch.

Kelp DAO moved rsETH to Chainlink CCIP in early May while its dispute with LayerZero over responsibility for the exploit continued to deepen. LayerZero denied that the single-verifier configuration had been approved by its staff.

Solv Protocol shifted $700 million in tokenised Bitcoin, including SolvBTC and xSolvBTC, from LayerZero to CCIP on May 7. Re.xyz followed with $475 million in TVL, citing CCIP’s 16 independent validator nodes and built-in rate limits as the deciding factors.

Chainlink CCIP has supported over $28 trillion in cumulative on-chain transaction value and averages approximately $90 million in weekly token transfers. The protocol is the only oracle platform to hold both ISO 27001 and SOC 2 Type 2 certification.

LayerZero has since removed support for 1-of-1 DVN configurations and announced plans to move most routes toward stricter 5-of-5 verifier setups. Despite the migrations, the protocol said more than $9 billion in bridged assets moved through its infrastructure since April 19.

CME Group and ICE urged US regulators to scrutinize Hyperliquid for manipulation and sanctions risks on May 15.

CME and ICE warned that Hyperliquid’s anonymous, round-the-clock perpetual futures trading could distort global commodity benchmarks, particularly in oil markets. The exchanges also flagged risks of insider coordination and sanctions evasion by state-linked participants exploiting the platform’s permissionless structure.

Hyperliquid holds a market capitalisation of approximately $10.3 billion, making HYPE the 13th-largest crypto asset globally. At its April 2025 peak, the platform accounted for roughly 70% of the on-chain perpetual futures market.

HYPE falls as Wall Street targets DeFi perp venue

The pressure campaign comes as Hyperliquid has expanded into synthetic markets for stocks and commodities, placing it in direct competition with CME and ICE. Both exchanges operate under strict regulatory oversight that Hyperliquid currently does not face.

The Hyperliquid Policy Center argued the platform provides markets that are “more beneficial and present fewer risks than traditional centralised exchanges” and expects the CFTC to develop a tailored regulatory framework for on-chain derivatives platforms.

Hyperliquid launched the Policy Center in Washington in February 2026, selecting veteran crypto policy lawyer Jake Chervinsky to lead the organisation. The group has held direct meetings with the CFTC aimed at establishing a legal path for US retail participation.

The platform had positioned itself as a beneficiary of rising oil perps activity in early 2026, with open interest in oil-linked perpetual contracts surging as the Iran conflict disrupted global energy markets.

The Hyper Foundation addressed community concerns over validator configuration earlier this year, framing transparency and decentralisation as central to Hyperliquid’s competitive proposition against regulated venues. No formal regulatory action has been announced.

TLDR

• Nvidia’s quarterly results arrive next week amid sky-high expectations for AI chip sales
• Treasury yields are climbing as inflation persistence worries mount, weighing on tech valuations
• Crude oil rallies on Middle East tensions, compounding inflation headaches
• Retail giants Walmart, Home Depot, and Target deliver earnings that will reveal consumer strength
• Pershing Square’s Bill Ackman reveals a substantial new Microsoft stake, praising its attractive pricing

A pivotal week lies ahead for market participants as multiple crucial narratives intersect. AI investment momentum, persistent inflation, commodity volatility, consumer spending trends, and high-profile portfolio moves are all commanding attention simultaneously. Here’s your essential briefing.

Nvidia: Moment of Truth for the AI Revolution

The spotlight this week centers squarely on Nvidia’s quarterly financial disclosure. This semiconductor powerhouse has emerged as arguably the most consequential stock in the entire S&P 500 index, propelled by extraordinary appetite for its datacenter processors that power artificial intelligence platforms.

Anticipation is running exceptionally high. The company’s shares have ranked among the market’s elite performers throughout the past twelve months. Consequently, the threshold for triggering a favorable market response has been pushed considerably higher.

Should Nvidia post impressive figures and elevate its forward outlook, the entire AI investment thesis could receive renewed validation and energy. Conversely, underwhelming results risk triggering a widespread selloff across semiconductor manufacturers, technology behemoths, and AI infrastructure plays.

Investors will scrutinize this release as a tangible gauge of whether enterprise capital allocation toward artificial intelligence capabilities continues to expand at an accelerating pace.

Inflation Anxieties and Bond Market Turbulence Create Headwinds

Beyond the Nvidia narrative, inflation has reemerged as a primary market preoccupation. U.S. Treasury yields have climbed toward levels not witnessed in approximately twelve months, reflecting a fundamental reassessment of Federal Reserve rate reduction prospects.

Elevated bond yields pose a significant challenge for growth-oriented equities. As fixed-income instruments deliver improved returns, market participants demonstrate reduced willingness to accept premium valuations for enterprises with earnings projections extending far into the future. This dynamic directly impacts artificial intelligence, technology, and software-focused companies.

Energy markets have amplified these concerns. Brent crude prices advanced as geopolitical instability across the Middle East sustained market nervousness. Escalating petroleum costs can accelerate general price increases, elevate corporate expense structures, and diminish household purchasing capacity.

The combination of ascending yields alongside rising energy prices creates a challenging environment for the high-growth, richly-valued stocks that have powered recent market gains.

Retail Earnings Will Gauge Consumer Resilience

The week’s other centerpiece involves a concentrated cluster of retail sector reports. Walmart, Home Depot, Target, and TJX all release results in the coming days.

Walmart commands particular scrutiny. As a dominant purveyor of food staples, household necessities, and everyday merchandise, it functions as an unfiltered barometer of lower- and middle-class American spending behavior.

Home Depot’s performance will illuminate conditions throughout the residential construction and renovation sectors. Target and TJX will indicate whether consumers continue allocating dollars toward clothing and non-essential purchases amid tightening household budgets.

Collectively, these financial snapshots will determine whether the American consumer maintains momentum or shows signs of retrenchment.

Ackman Places His Chips on Microsoft

Prominent hedge fund investor Bill Ackman announced that Pershing Square has been accumulating shares in Microsoft beginning in February. He characterized the company’s current valuation as attractive.

Ackman commands substantial influence among Wall Street observers, ensuring his disclosure generated considerable interest. Microsoft’s equity story intertwines deeply with artificial intelligence and cloud infrastructure through its Azure platform, Microsoft 365 Copilot applications, and strategic alliance with OpenAI.

This investment appears synchronized with Ackman divesting his Alphabet holdings, establishing a clear comparison between divergent AI implementation approaches. Microsoft emphasizes corporate software solutions and cloud services. Alphabet’s foundation rests on internet search, digital advertising, and proprietary AI systems.

Ackman’s selection demonstrates conviction in Microsoft’s capacity to convert AI expenditures into immediate revenue streams through its established software ecosystem.

Looking Forward

The upcoming trading sessions will substantially influence prevailing market psychology. Nvidia’s disclosure will either validate or undermine the AI investment surge. Retail company results will deliver current intelligence on household financial health. Meanwhile, inflation indicators, energy market dynamics, and Treasury yields will continue governing valuation frameworks throughout the equity universe.

While AI innovation retains broad market appeal, capital allocators are exercising heightened discrimination regarding which specific enterprises and industries merit their backing.

Law firm Gerstein Harrow LLP has filed a fresh motion in a miscellaneous enforcement case, seeking more than $344 million in frozen USDt stablecoins that the firm says are linked to Iranian entities. The filing argues that the plaintiffs are owed over $532 million in compensatory damages and more than $1.8 billion in punitive damages tied to acts of terrorism allegedly sponsored by Iran, covering a span of more than 25 years. The move forms part of a broader lawsuit aimed at recouping digital assets as compensation for victims of state-sponsored violence by North Korea and Iran, a strategy that has sparked considerable debate within the crypto community.

In May, Gerstein Harrow filed a restraining notice against the Kelp decentralized autonomous organization, attempting to block the transfer of frozen Ether tied to the $293 million Kelp exploit in April. Critics have argued that such tactics can delay payments to victims of hacks, potentially deprioritizing those whose losses are directly tied to a breach, while extending the reach of asserts in unrelated judgments spanning decades.

The motion to claim $344 million in frozen stablecoins linked to Iranian entities. Source: PACER

The broader suit targets not only Iranian assets but also DPRK-linked holdings, with the aim of redistributing funds to victims of various judgments tied to state-sponsored violence. Crypto observers have questioned the legitimacy and timing of applying long-dormant judgments to current crypto assets, arguing that the approach may complicate or slow down relief for those harmed by more recent hacks.

In the same week, the U.S. Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) ordered Tether to freeze $344 million in USDt stablecoins tied to Iranian entities. The asset freeze drew mixed reactions within the industry, with some criticizing centralized issuers for enforcing sanctions through wallet-level freezes and others arguing that enforcement is a necessary, if complex, tool for sanction compliance.

Several insiders and commentators have joined the debate over the ethics and practicality of such asset-seizure strategies. ZachXBT, a well-known on-chain researcher and commentator, criticized Gerstein Harrow’s approach, labeling the firm “predatory” and “evil” in a May post. He argued that the law firm relies on security research about crypto hacks to justify claims against victims of state-sponsored wrongdoing, noting that attempts to seize assets tied to decades-old incidents can overshadow the restitution needs of actual hack victims today.

“This is a predatory US law firm with a strategy that is pure evil. Whenever there’s a new Lazarus Group victim after an exploit and crypto assets get frozen, these clowns come in and say they have a claim for an alleged DPRK victim from 26 years ago that has zero relation to crypto or exploits/hacks.”

— ZachXBT

The conversation around these motions has highlighted long-running tensions between punitive asset recovery efforts and practical restitution for those directly harmed by hacks. Earlier reporting noted that OFAC’s April action to freeze Iranian-linked USDt intensified debate about the role of centralized issuers in enforcing sanctions and the potential impact on asset holders who are not party to any wrongdoing. The case also echoes a pattern in which law firms pursue broad, cross-jurisdictional claims against crypto platforms and assets in the wake of hacks, prompting scrutiny from community members who worry about diluting compensation for actual victims.

The March-to-April period also saw other related actions, including a restraining order related to the Kelp DAO’s liquid staking activities, which underscores a broader legal tactic: securing crypto assets swiftly in the wake of a breach or sanction trigger, then pursuing multi-jurisdictional claims over those assets. Comparisons are being drawn to earlier high-profile cases involving hacks at platforms like Harmony and Bybit, where victims and observers weighed the ethics of using frozen or seized assets to satisfy broader, older judgments.

For investors and builders, the unfolding dispute raises questions about how asset recovery strategies might affect the flow of funds in post-hack scenarios and the ability of legitimate victims to access compensation in a timely manner. It also underscores the evolving legal risk profile for custody providers, exchanges, and other crypto-native entities that could be drawn into these multi-jurisdictional disputes as sanctions and enforcement actions intersect with civil claims.

The implications extend beyond the courtroom. As regulators and courts grapple with the balance between punitive measures and fair restitution, market participants will be watching how authorities and plaintiffs reconcile long-standing judgments with contemporary crypto asset dynamics. The next steps in this case—alongside ongoing enforcement actions and potential new filings—will likely influence how future asset-recovery efforts are structured and contested.

Readers should monitor upcoming court filings and regulatory moves for signs of how these strategies evolve. The core question remains whether broad asset-recovery measures can deliver timely relief to hack victims without compromising due process or creating unintended collateral effects for the broader crypto ecosystem.

The top Republicans and Democrats on the House Agriculture Committee have urged President Donald Trump to complete the leadership slate at the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), warning that a forthcoming crypto market-structure bill could hinge on timely appointments. In a Friday letter, Committee Chair Glenn Thompson and Ranking Member Angie Craig emphasized the need for a bipartisan, full panel to guide the agency through urgent regulatory issues and a substantial rulemaking process tied to the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act (CLARITY).

The lawmakers argued that having a complete commission is essential for the CFTC to serve as the leading derivatives markets regulator on a global stage and to advance U.S. leadership in market integrity, resilience, and vibrancy. Currently, Michael Selig serves as the agency’s only commissioner after the resignation of acting chair Caroline Pham in December 2025. Under Selig, the CFTC has pursued policy positions aligned with the administration, including asserting exclusive jurisdiction over prediction markets.

In related regulatory developments, CLARITY gained momentum in the Senate. On Thursday, lawmakers on the Senate Banking Committee voted to advance the CLARITY Act, which would broaden the CFTC’s authority over digital asset markets and shape the regulatory framework for crypto businesses and users. While a floor vote had not been scheduled at press time, the legislative trajectory underscores the link between leadership and the speed of rulemaking in this sector. Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar, who sits on the Senate Agriculture Committee, proposed an amendment in January to delay the act’s effective date until at least four CFTC commissioners were nominated and confirmed.

As of Friday, there were no public announcements from Trump about CFTC commissioner nominations. Any such selections would need to clear Senate processes, a timeline that could extend weeks or months and influence the pace of regulatory clarity for market participants. In context, the House letter from Thompson and Craig signals a broader concern within Congress about ensuring regulatory bodies have sufficient leadership capacity to implement policy changes and oversee a rapidly evolving crypto market structure.

Key takeaways

• The House Agriculture Committee urges President Trump to nominate a full bipartisan panel for the CFTC to prepare for possible CLARITY Act implementation and ongoing rulemaking needs.
• The CLARITY Act advanced in the Senate Banking Committee, signaling a potential expansion of the CFTC’s oversight over digital asset markets.
• The CFTC currently operates with a single commissioner after the December 2025 resignation of acting chair Caroline Pham, raising questions about regulatory momentum and enforcement capacity.
• A memorandum of understanding between the CFTC and the SEC, signed in March, reflects enhanced inter-agency coordination on market oversight, including digital assets.
• The nomination timeline remains uncertain; presidential picks would face Senate confirmation, with implications for both regulatory certainty and market operations.

Leadership, rulemaking and regulatory posture at the CFTC

The current leadership gap at the CFTC places a greater emphasis on the commission’s ability to drive rulemaking and oversee complex derivatives markets in a period of heightened regulatory attention on digital assets. Michael Selig, the agency’s sole commissioner, has indicated a continuing pace in rulemaking, stating in an April hearing that he did not intend to slow down, even as the hierarchy remains short of four commissioners. The absence of a full slate can slow consensus-driven rulemaking, complicate policymaking timelines, and potentially affect how fast new market-structure rules or digital asset-related standards are issued and enforced.

The CFTC’s memorandum of understanding with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, signed in March, signals a strategic tilt toward synchronized, cross-agency oversight of markets that increasingly intersect with digital assets. This coordination aims to align approaches to market integrity, data reporting, and enforcement—an important development for exchanges, traders, and institutions seeking regulatory certainty and consistency across U.S. market infrastructure.

In parallel, the agency has sought to delineate its jurisdiction on emerging products, including prediction markets. While such positions support a clear regulatory stance, they also heighten the need for experienced leadership to steward ongoing rulemakings and ensure policy coherence with other federal bodies. The current dynamic shows that ongoing rulemaking, enforcement priorities, and market-structure decisions could depend on whether a complete CFTC commission is confirmed in a timely fashion.

CLARITY Act: momentum, governance thresholds, and market implications

The CLARITY Act represents a turning point in how digital asset markets might be regulated in the United States. By expanding the CFTC’s mandate and tools for overseeing crypto markets, the bill is positioned to shape the operational landscape for crypto firms, exchanges, and investors. For market participants, the potential outcomes include clearer regulatory standards, more predictable supervision, and enhanced enforcement capabilities in areas where digital assets intersect with traditional derivatives and commodities markets. The measure’s success will hinge not only on policy design but also on the regulatory capacity demonstrated by a fully staffed CFTC.

The legislative dynamic includes a notable amendment proposal from Senator Klobuchar to condition the act’s effectiveness on the confirmation of at least four CFTC commissioners. This proposed safeguard underscores concerns about governance continuity and policy implementation risk if leadership remains constrained. While the Senate has advanced the bill, a floor vote remains pending, and the interaction between congressional timelines and agency staffing could determine how rapidly new digital asset rules take form and how they are implemented across the market infrastructure.

From a compliance and institutional perspective, CLARITY’s passage or delays hold material implications. Crypto firms, banks interacting with digital asset desks, and institutional traders face a future framework that could harmonize or complicate existing regimes, depending on how the CFTC delegates authority, defines product classifications, and aligns with cross-border standards. In this sense, the broader policy question extends beyond technical rulemaking: it concerns the balance of regulatory authority, supervisory certainty, and the resilience of U.S. markets in a rapidly evolving asset class.

Congressional dynamics and staffing timelines: what to watch

Looking ahead, the pace of nominations to fill the CFTC’s commissioner ranks will weigh on how quickly the United States can align its market-structure policies with emerging digital-asset realities. President Trump’s forthcoming selections—and the Senate’s confirmation process—will shape the ability of the agency to execute a rigorous CLARITY-driven agenda and address ongoing regulation of complex derivatives and crypto-related products. While leadership transitions are inherently uncertain, lawmakers on both sides of the aisle have underscored the importance of a complete commission to ensure policy continuity, robust oversight, and credible regulatory signaling to markets and investors alike.

Beyond staffing, the evolving regulatory architecture will be tested by how the CFTC and SEC coordinate on cross-cutting issues such as data reporting, product definitions, and enforcement priorities. As the U.S. moves to potentially broaden CFTC jurisdiction via CLARITY, institutions should monitor not only the legislative timetable but also the maturation of inter-agency governance and the precision of rulemakings that will directly affect compliance programs, licensing considerations, and cross-border operations with other jurisdictions.

In a broader policy context, observers should note how the United States balances market innovation with investor protections, particularly in comparison to parallel developments under regimes like the European Union’s MiCA framework. The sequence of staffing decisions, legislative clearance, and regulatory rulemaking will collectively determine the clarity and practicality of the U.S. market structure for digital assets in the near to medium term.

Closing perspective: as Congress advances CLARITY and lawmakers press for a fully staffed CFTC, market participants should prepare for a period of heightened regulatory scrutiny and potential shifts in oversight that could affect product classifications, reporting requirements, and enforcement priorities. The coming weeks and months will be pivotal in defining the scope and pace of U.S. crypto market regulation.

Revolut secured FCA approval on May 14 to offer private wealth services and leveraged products in the UK.

Victoria Laffey, head of operations at Revolut Trading, said the new permissions are “the missing piece allowing us to unite investment, advisory and portfolio management under one roof, making them even more accessible.”

The Variation of Permissions gives Revolut Trading the regulatory tools to manage client investment portfolios and deal as principal, enabling leveraged investment products, discretionary portfolio management and advisory services for retail, professional and high-net-worth clients within a single platform.

FCA approval opens wealth management push

Revolut won a full UK banking licence from the Prudential Regulation Authority in March 2026 after a three year application process. The licence transformed the fintech from an electronic money institution into a fully regulated bank, providing the legal foundation required to expand into wealth management and lending.

The company is reportedly planning a private banking unit for later this summer, targeting clients with at least £500,000 in deposits. The minimum would position Revolut between Coutts, which recently raised its threshold to £3 million, and the mass affluent segment traditional private banks have largely left underserved.

Revolut’s wealth division has become a major revenue contributor. The company secured a MiCA crypto licence through Cyprus in October 2025, giving it passportable access to 30 European Economic Area markets for regulated crypto services. More than 10 million customers already hold or trade crypto on the platform.

The FCA permissions pair with Revolut’s broader regulatory expansion. The company applied for a US national banking charter in March 2026, targeting access to American payment rails and credit products ahead of a planned 2028 IPO. Wealth revenues at the firm climbed 31% to $876 million in 2025, with crypto activity cited as a meaningful driver.

Key Highlights

• The coffee chain is eliminating 300 corporate positions in the U.S. spanning technology, finance, marketing, and research divisions
• Four regional corporate hubs in Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas, and Burbank are being shut down
• Restructuring expenses will total $400 million
• Additional workforce reductions in international markets are anticipated as the company evaluates its global support structure
• SBUX shares climbed approximately 1% on Friday after the news broke

Starbucks (SBUX) stock experienced a modest uptick of roughly 1% on Friday following the coffee giant’s announcement of 300 corporate job eliminations and multiple regional office closures, continuing CEO Brian Niccol’s transformation strategy.

Starbucks Corporation, SBUX

The workforce reductions target employees stationed in Seattle and those working remotely throughout the nation. Departments affected encompass technology, marketing, finance, and research and development operations. Front-line retail workers will remain untouched by these cuts.

Starbucks is simultaneously closing down regional corporate facilities in Chicago, Atlanta, Dallas, and Burbank, California. The company plans to maintain operations in New York, Toronto, Coral Gables, and its primary Seattle headquarters, alongside a forthcoming Nashville facility.

The coffee retailer anticipates incurring $400 million in restructuring expenses associated with these strategic changes. Within that total, $280 million represents non-cash charges stemming from asset impairments, particularly right-of-use lease assets and related long-lived assets.

The remaining $120 million in cash-based charges primarily cover employee severance and separation packages. Importantly, none of these financial charges impact Starbucks’ retail coffee shop network.

These reductions form part of an ambitious initiative to eliminate $2 billion in operational expenses by fiscal year 2028. The projected savings will help fund substantial investments planned for cafe-level improvements and operations.

International Workforce Reductions Expected

Starbucks acknowledged it is conducting a comprehensive evaluation of its international support infrastructure. The organization stated it “expects additional role impacts outside the U.S.” as it transitions toward becoming a “world-class licensor.”

A company representative informed Investing.com that the corporation is simultaneously “streamlining its real estate footprint” and reassessing lease obligations on a global scale.

This marks another chapter in Niccol’s restructuring campaign. During the previous year, Starbucks eliminated approximately 2,000 corporate positions through two separate reduction rounds and shuttered hundreds of retail locations across the United States.

Despite the cutbacks, the company continues making strategic investments. Starbucks is developing a new $100 million corporate campus in Nashville designed to accommodate 2,000 employees. Technology and supply-chain functions are being relocated from Seattle to this emerging operational center.

Certain senior executives have been granted stock-based incentives worth $6 million contingent upon achieving the cost-reduction objectives.

Nashville Expansion Progresses

The Nashville facility signifies a strategic geographic realignment in Starbucks’ corporate infrastructure approach.

Although Seattle continues as the primary headquarters, the organization is clearly redistributing functions rather than engaging in across-the-board elimination.

The $280 million in non-cash expenses primarily relate to a comprehensive reevaluation of its Starbucks Reserve and Roastery concepts, combined with initiatives to enhance efficiency at non-retail support locations.

Starbucks emphasized that none of the office consolidations or restructuring costs are linked to its coffeehouse retail operations.

The company’s international organizational review remains in progress, with additional announcements regarding overseas positions anticipated in coming months.