Meta CEO Mark Zuckerberg has sounded a note of caution on the pace of “agentic” AI development, telling employees that progress on autonomous agents has not accelerated as quickly as expected despite heavy investment by major technology and crypto firms.

Speaking during a company meeting on Thursday, Zuckerberg said the “trajectory of the agentic development over at least the last four months hasn’t really accelerated in the way that we expected,” Reuters reported after reviewing a recording of the call. He added that the broader bet on agent adoption “hasn’t come to fruition yet,” even as leadership pushed harder into agent-focused infrastructure earlier this year.

Key takeaways

• Zuckerberg said Meta’s agentic AI progress has not matched expectations over the past four months, according to Reuters.
• Meta executives accelerated agent-focused infrastructure plans in January due to concerns they were moving too slowly.
• Meta still expects returns from its AI spending within three to six months, Zuckerberg said.
• Meta expanded its Meta Business Agent globally for businesses across Instagram, Messenger, and WhatsApp.
• Blockchain data suggests AI-agent transaction activity remains limited, including only about $2 million in x402-facilitated volume over the last 30 days, per Artemis.

Meta’s AI agents: expectations versus delivery

Zuckerberg’s remarks highlight a growing mismatch between the industry’s timeline for autonomous AI agents and how quickly real-world systems can scale and deliver value. While agentic AI has captured attention from both software giants and crypto-adjacent companies, Zuckerberg indicated that even within a company widely positioned for rapid experimentation, momentum has been slower than planned.

Reuters reported that Zuckerberg pointed to a lack of acceleration in the “last four months,” despite a push intended to close perceived speed gaps. He acknowledged that an aggressive January push into agentic infrastructure was driven by fears that Meta wasn’t advancing “fast enough,” while also framing the current state as not yet reaching the level of adoption leadership expected.

At the same time, Zuckerberg said he believes Meta’s AI investments will start paying off within the next three to six months. That timeframe matters for investors and teams because it signals management still expects near-term results—even if the broader agent ecosystem remains behind schedule.

Business Agent rollout across Meta’s messaging and social apps

Meta’s comments came alongside new product deployment. On Thursday, the company expanded its Meta Business Agent globally, aiming to bring agent capabilities to businesses operating across Instagram, Messenger, and WhatsApp.

According to Meta, the Business Agent is designed to handle customer inquiries, make product recommendations, and close sales without requiring human intervention. For businesses, the appeal is straightforward: agent systems can reduce response times and staffing pressure while enabling commerce flows inside channels where customers already interact.

Zuckerberg also previously said in March that he was building a personal AI agent to support CEO decision-making, reinforcing Meta’s view that agent tooling can move beyond customer-facing automation into internal workflows.

Crypto’s agent payments thesis faces measured on-chain activity

Zuckerberg’s reality check lands amid a crypto industry that has largely embraced the idea that AI agents could become major users of blockchain payments. Executives including Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong and Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire have previously predicted that AI agents may become dominant users of blockchain-based payment rails in the coming years, as noted in coverage referenced by Cointelegraph.

In support of that narrative, several integrations have been announced in recent months. Cointelegraph previously reported that Amazon Web Services integrated Coinbase’s x402 payments protocol into Amazon Bedrock AgentCore in May, enabling agents to transact using the USDC stablecoin. Other examples cited include a Visa-supported virtual card for AI agents from Oobit launched in April for purchases in USDt (USDT).

However, the gap between “capability” and “usage” is showing up in on-chain volume. Artemis data cited by Cointelegraph suggests that AI-agent transaction activity facilitated through the x402 protocol remains comparatively small: only $2 million in trading volume over the past 30 days.

This matters because the crypto payments story around autonomous agents depends not just on integrations being possible, but on consistent demand emerging from actual agent behavior. Low volume can indicate early-stage adoption, experimentation without sustained deployment, or limitations in how agents currently interact with payment endpoints.

What to watch next for agentic AI and stablecoin payments

Zuckerberg’s comments suggest the industry may need to plan for a slower-than-hoped transition period as agentic systems mature and as businesses learn where automation genuinely outperforms human-led workflows. At the same time, Meta’s investment outlook—expecting payback within three to six months—signals continued pressure to convert AI spending into operational results.

For the blockchain segment, the next checkpoint should be whether on-chain payment volume tied to agent infrastructure increases materially from current levels, and whether new business-facing deployments like Meta Business Agent lead to measurable downstream demand for stablecoin payment rails.

Shielded Labs has raised the possibility of delaying Zcash’s Ironwood network upgrade, warning that ecosystem participants like exchanges, mining pools and wallets may not have enough time to prepare their systems for the planned activation in late July. 

Jason McGee, executive director of Shielded Labs, said in a Zcash community forum post that two major projects are moving forward at the same time. Alongside Ironwood, infrastructure providers are being asked to replace Zcash’s longstanding node and wallet software, zcashd, with a new collection of tools known as the Z3 stack.

The concerns highlight the trade-off between quickly restoring confidence in Zcash’s shielded supply and giving ecosystem participants enough time to deploy and audit the new infrastructure safely. 

Ironwood was proposed after researchers discovered an “infinity” bug in Orchard, Zcash’s main private transaction pool. The flaw could theoretically have allowed an attacker to create an unlimited amount of counterfeit ZEC tokens inside the pool without detection. Developers said there was no evidence that the pool had been exploited. However, Orchard’s privacy features make it impossible to prove that no fake coins were created. 

Source: Zooko Wilcox

Ironwood rollout collides with Zcash software migration

Ironwood would open a replacement private pool and prevent new activity inside the existing Orchard pool. Funds leaving Orchard would have to pass through an accounting checkpoint that prevents more ZEC from exiting than what originally entered. This would allow users to verify that the circulating supply remains within Zcash’s intended limits. 

At the same time, Zcash is retiring zcashd, the software used by many ecosystem participants to connect to the network and process transactions. Its replacement stack includes Zebra for operating a network node, Zaino for supplying blockchain data to applications and Zallet for wallet functions. 

The network’s official guidance documents said operators may need to modify their systems as some zcashd functions will not have direct replacements. 

Related: Why ZEC fell 40% even after Zcash patched a shielded pool bug

McGee said Zallet and Zaino were still under development and not ready for production use. Feedback gathered from infrastructure providers suggested that some expect to be ready by late July, while others need more time, he added.

McGee said no delay has been finalized. 

Zcash founder Zooko Wilcox said security reviews had found no additional serious bugs so far and that developers are also working to verify the new system before Ironwood activates. 

Magazine: Bitcoin decouples from tech stocks, Ether eyes ‘selling wave’: Market Moves

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand has renewed her push for tighter ethics rules around digital assets, proposing that elected officials—and the president and their spouse—be barred from issuing or sponsoring their own tokens. Her latest remarks explicitly referenced President Donald Trump and First Lady Melania Trump’s memecoin activity.

Gillibrand, a New York Democrat involved in negotiations over US digital asset legislation, said in a Friday announcement that Congress should consider measures preventing public officials from using their position to promote or benefit from token launches. The proposal focuses on “issuing or sponsoring” digital assets, and would apply to a president and their spouse; it did not spell out whether similar restrictions should cover the vice president’s office or other relatives.

Key takeaways

• Senator Kirsten Gillibrand proposed banning presidents and elected officials from issuing or sponsoring their own tokens, including memecoins.
• The restriction would clearly cover the president and their spouse, but the scope for vice presidents or other family members was not specified.
• Gillibrand links the idea to concerns about self-dealing, consumer protection, and efforts to curb illicit finance.
• Her comments come amid broader Senate work on digital asset market-structure and stablecoin legislation that has faced ethics-related scrutiny.
• The proposal follows shifting approaches in earlier legislation consideration around Trump-related crypto involvement.

Why Gillibrand is targeting token sponsorship by officials

In her Friday statement, Gillibrand argued that “public officials and their spouses should not be issuing memecoins,” framing the move as basic conflict-of-interest prevention rather than a partisan effort. She said the goal is to stop self-dealing from undermining consumer protections and complicating efforts against illicit finance.

The senator’s remarks emphasize the potential for elected officials to benefit from token-related projects that could be influenced by their access to policymakers, regulators, and legislative timelines. In her view, such concerns are especially urgent in markets that are still developing guardrails for disclosure, investor protections, and anti-manipulation enforcement.

Connection to the CLARITY Act and ethics as a gating issue

Gillibrand is also one of the lawmakers involved in negotiations on the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act in the Senate. According to prior reporting, progress on the bill has been slowed by worries that extend beyond token rules themselves—particularly concerns about ethics, tokenization practices, and stablecoin reward structures.

Gillibrand previously indicated that the chamber could not move forward without addressing ethics questions, pointing to the risk that elected officials could “get rich” from insider access. In that context, the token-sponsorship proposal aligns with her broader stance that ethics constraints should be treated as foundational, not optional.

The senator’s framing also highlights a recurring legislative tension in the US crypto policy debate: how to extend oversight to new financial products while limiting opportunities for lawmakers to profit from the very markets they help shape.

How stablecoin and memecoin provisions were handled in earlier legislation

During consideration of the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins Act (GENIUS Act), Gillibrand said senators had removed provisions that specifically targeted Trump’s ties to the crypto industry, including his memecoin Official Trump. In her account at the time, the memecoin was likely “illegal based on current law,” but she suggested that trying to fully cover Trump-related ethics issues would require a “very long and detailed bill.”

Eventually, Trump signed the GENIUS Act into law in July 2025. Gillibrand’s new proposal suggests that even after that outcome—when lawmakers reportedly narrowed focus on Trump-specific provisions—ethics concerns have not gone away. Instead, she appears to be seeking a more general rule that would constrain future token issuance by officials and their spouses.

Notably, Gillibrand’s proposed memecoin restriction did not appear to be designed as a blanket ban covering all family members. The difference matters politically and legally: it shapes how broadly the rule could reach beyond a president’s spouse, while still addressing the most direct relationship that can be tightly linked to official influence.

Trump’s response and the wider conflict-of-interest debate

Gillibrand’s renewed comments arrive as Trump has continued to dismiss perceived conflicts of interest involving his crypto investments. This week, he reported that he earned about $1.4 billion from crypto ventures in the year he took office, while also holding the power to influence legislation that affects digital assets, including both the GENIUS Act and the CLARITY Act.

According to Trump, there was “nothing illegal” and “nothing wrong” with profiting from investments while serving as president, and he did not directly answer questions about the perceived conflicts. The contrast with Gillibrand’s position is stark: she argues that legality alone does not resolve the underlying ethical risk when public officials’ influence intersects with markets where their own token or sponsorship interests could be monetized.

The broader backdrop also includes criticism of involvement by Trump’s sons in crypto-adjacent ventures, including their connection to World Liberty Financial and a Bitcoin mining company described as American Bitcoin. While Gillibrand’s new proposal does not explicitly extend to those broader family circumstances, it reinforces that lawmakers and watchdog voices remain focused on whether personal ties to crypto create unfair advantages or distort policy incentives.

For investors and builders, the practical significance of Gillibrand’s proposal is straightforward: if adopted, a ban on token issuance or sponsorship by officials (and a president’s spouse) could reduce expectations of politically driven token promotion. It may also shape how exchanges, issuers, and intermediaries approach compliance and disclosure when influential figures are involved.

Still, much remains uncertain. Key questions include how “sponsoring” would be defined in law, whether enforcement would rely on existing securities and commodities frameworks, and—if a rule passes—how much legislative time it would take to harmonize it with the ongoing CLARITY Act process. Readers should watch how ethics language evolves in both the market-structure and stablecoin bills, and whether lawmakers treat conflict-of-interest guardrails as a prerequisite rather than an afterthought.

Key Highlights

• Morpho secured $175M in funding to scale its blockchain-based credit infrastructure worldwide.
• Paradigm, a16z crypto, and Ribbit Capital spearheaded the investment round.
• Deel integrated Morpho to deliver stablecoin yield to international contractors.
• Zama introduced confidential USDC deposits to Morpho Vaults shortly after going live.
• Coinbase, BitGo, Juno, HashKey and Huma are expanding Morpho’s ecosystem reach.

Morpho completed a $175 million fundraising round designed to accelerate its open credit infrastructure as blockchain technology penetrates deeper into mainstream finance. The round was spearheaded by Paradigm, a16z crypto, and Ribbit Capital. This capital injection empowers Morpho to construct a comprehensive credit layer serving fintech companies, institutional players, and blockchain-native platforms.

Morpho eyes expansion into broader credit markets

The funding round attracted participation from Apollo Funds, Circle Ventures, VanEck, Ledger, Cathay Innovation, and additional strategic investors. This investment arrives during a period when financial institutions are actively exploring blockchain infrastructure. Importantly, many organizations have shifted from experimental pilots toward implementing real-world applications.

Morpho has developed lending infrastructure that facilitates connections between capital providers and borrowers via open marketplace mechanisms. While the platform currently serves crypto-native lending markets, its ultimate ambition extends to global credit systems. Consequently, the technology aims to eliminate inefficiencies throughout lending, yield generation, and capital deployment.

Coinbase, Robinhood, and Kraken have already integrated Morpho infrastructure to power cryptocurrency-focused financial offerings. These implementations demonstrate how consumer-facing platforms can incorporate credit and yield capabilities directly into their existing applications. Users benefit by accessing blockchain-based financial instruments without departing from familiar platforms.

Deel launches stablecoin yield for global workforce

Deel partnered with the Morpho Network to provide stablecoin-based rewards on contractor account balances. The initial deployment begins in Argentina, with Deel targeting worldwide expansion subsequently. This product enables users to earn dollar-denominated returns within the same application they use for receiving work payments.

This collaboration illustrates how workforce management and payroll platforms can transform into comprehensive financial service providers. Contractors gain the ability to receive compensation, maintain balances, and generate returns without adopting new systems. As such, Morpho obtains another distribution channel through a prominent business-oriented fintech platform.

This approach also represents a broader transformation throughout the financial technology sector. Applications with established user bases now incorporate embedded yield generation, credit facilities, and stablecoin functionalities. Within this framework, Morpho operates as underlying infrastructure while fintech brands control customer relationships and user experience.

Financial institutions advance toward blockchain-based credit offerings

Morpho strengthened its institutional engagement through Vault Summit NYC, co-organized with S&P Global at the New York Stock Exchange. The conference emphasized blockchain-based asset management and enterprise-grade financial products. It also revealed heightened interest from institutions assessing blockchain infrastructure for credit market applications.

Institutional participants require enhanced privacy capabilities before widespread adoption can accelerate. Zama responded to this demand by introducing confidential tokens within Morpho Vaults. This solution allows users to generate yield while protecting wallet information, position sizes, and investment strategies.

Within just four days, users contributed over $10 million in Confidential USDC through Zama-connected vaults. Coinbase’s High Yield DeFi earn product exceeded $100 million in total deposits. Morpho plans further expansion through partnerships with BitGo, Juno by Bitso, HashKey, Huma Finance, and policy initiatives with the Crypto Council.

ESMA has published the first post-transitional update to its EU crypto register under MiCA, adding 37 newly licensed crypto-asset service providers (CASPs) after the regulation’s transition period ended on Wednesday.

In Friday’s update, the EU supervisory body listed 37 additional CASPs—bringing the interim total to 280. Among the additions is Standard Chartered, which received MiCA authorization from Luxembourg regulators on June 25.

Key takeaways

• ESMA’s interim MiCA register now lists 280 CASPs, up from 243 in the previous update dated June 26.
• 37 new CASPs were added after MiCA’s transitional period ended Wednesday, including major banking and digital-asset firms.
• Cyprus led the latest wave of authorizations by jurisdiction, with six of the newly listed CASPs.
• The asset-referenced token (ART) register remains unchanged, with no approved issuers shown.
• The non-compliant entities list continues to stand at 162, according to the update.

ESMA adds 37 CASPs to the MiCA register

ESMA’s update to its register of crypto companies reflects the regulator’s ongoing effort to make MiCA authorizations visible in a single public list. The latest posting was released after the transitional period concluded, which is intended to bridge activity until firms either obtain MiCA permissions or adjust their operations to comply with the new framework.

According to ESMA, the interim MiCA register now totals 280 CASPs. This follows the previous update published on June 26, which listed 243 CASPs—an increase of 37 entries in this first post-transition step.

The newly added CASPs include a range of business models. ESMA’s list now features names such as FalconX (a digital asset prime brokerage), Sygnum Europe, and Ronin EM, alongside financial institutions that can perform MiCA-regulated crypto activities.

Standard Chartered’s MiCA authorization expands—alongside an EMI license

Standard Chartered stands out among the headline additions. In addition to securing MiCA authorization from Luxembourg regulators, the bank also received an Electronic Money Institution (EMI) license, enabling it to issue electronic money and provide payment services.

Standard Chartered said in a Monday announcement that the approvals represent a “key step” in advancing its European digital-asset strategy. The bank also framed its decision as responsive to client demand for regulated access to digital assets in Europe, referencing prior progress including the launch of digital asset custody services in Asia and the Middle East.

ESMA’s register update matters for investors and counterparties because CASP listings provide a visible checkpoint for regulated market access. For banks, prime brokers, and other service providers, MiCA permissions can also be a practical prerequisite for operating under a standardized EU framework rather than relying solely on member-state approaches.

Standard Chartered’s approvals were announced on the bank’s website: https://www.sc.com/uk/2026/06/29/standard-chartered-granted-mica-and-emi-licence-advancing-its-digital-asset-strategy-in-europe/.

New CASPs also include EMT token activity via CACEIS

ESMA’s update was not limited to MiCA’s broader CASP categories. The register of electronic money tokens (EMTs) added Crédit Agricole’s CACEIS, according to the Friday update.

Separately, earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted Crédit Agricole and CACEIS in the context of EMT-related developments ahead of the updated register entries. That earlier reporting is linked here: https://cointelegraph.com/news/credit-agricole-eurxt-euro-stablecoin-caceis.

Jurisdictional picture: Cyprus leads; Germany still on top

While the ESMA register is EU-wide, authorizations are issued by national authorities. In the latest wave, Cyprus accounted for six of the newly listed CASPs, the largest share among jurisdictions.

France recorded five new entries, as did Italy and Malta. The Czech Republic and Spain each added four new CASPs. Luxembourg listed three and the Netherlands added two. Germany, Liechtenstein, and Latvia each contributed one new entry.

ESMA’s update also provides perspective on the broader accumulation of authorizations. It states that CySEC has now granted 21 MiCA authorizations in total, while BaFin remains the national regulator with the most authorizations at 58.

For market participants, this distribution can be relevant: it highlights where regulatory capacity and licensing pipelines may be moving faster, which in turn can influence where firms choose to apply first.

What did not change: no ART issuers and no movement on non-compliance

ESMA’s post-transition update included no changes to two other register components.

The asset-referenced token (ART) register continued to show no approved issuers. In parallel, the list of non-compliant entities remained at 162, according to the update.

That lack of ART issuer approvals contrasts with the steady progress in CASP licensing and underscores a point many market participants are watching: different parts of MiCA’s ecosystem are moving at different speeds. CASPs can begin positioning under MiCA permissions while token issuers—particularly for categories such as ARTs—may face a longer path to approvals.

Going forward, the next register updates will be important not only for how quickly the CASP count rises, but also for whether the ART register finally changes; until then, investors and counterparties may want to treat MiCA’s service-provider authorizations as a clearer near-term indicator of regulatory readiness than token-issuer approvals.

South Korean crypto exchange Upbit says it will not take part in the issuance of Open USD (OUSD), despite an operator-level connection to the stablecoin project. The clarification comes after Open Standard named Dunamu among more than 140 businesses associated with its new dollar-backed initiative.

In a statement to Cointelegraph, an Upbit spokesperson said the exchange has only “indicated our potential willingness to consider taking part in the future expansion of the OpenStandard ecosystem.” The company’s position follows similar pushback from other South Korean firms that were included in Open Standard’s broader business list.

Key takeaways

• Upbit denies participation in OUSD issuance, limiting its stance to possible future involvement in the OpenStandard ecosystem.
• Open Standard’s public roster includes major South Korean companies, but several say they have not agreed to specific roles.
• Regulatory uncertainty in South Korea persists because the Digital Asset Basic Act has not yet been finalized.
• Open Standard’s “no fees / no volume limits” mint-and-redeem model remains a subject of debate among industry observers.

Upbit’s clarification reshapes how Open Standard’s list is read

Open Standard announced Open USD on Tuesday, describing a framework under which participating businesses would be able to mint and redeem the stablecoin without fees or volume limits. The project also said it plans to distribute earnings generated from its reserves to participating companies.

Open Standard’s announcement listed a broad group of firms—reportedly more than 140—stating they had “signed up to use” the stablecoin. Among those named were global payments and finance brands including Visa and Mastercard, as well as asset management and tech firms such as BlackRock and Google. In South Korea, Dunamu was included, which is the operator behind Upbit.

That inclusion prompted follow-up clarification from Upbit. The exchange said it is not participating in OUSD issuance, and only signaled openness to potentially joining “future expansion” of the OpenStandard ecosystem. Cointelegraph also reported that it reached out to Open Standard for comment but did not receive a response before publication.

The broader implication is that the public business list may represent interest or preliminary alignment rather than committed operational roles. That distinction matters for users and market participants watching whether large incumbents are truly underwriting, distributing, or managing parts of the stablecoin’s reserve and governance.

Other South Korean companies reportedly echo “no formal role” concerns

According to a Friday report by ChosunBiz, Samsung Electronics said it had not held formal discussions with Open Standard and did not know what role it was expected to play. The same reporting also indicated Shinhan Financial Group and KBank had only signaled they would consider the initiative.

These responses highlight a recurring pattern in early-stage stablecoin announcements: companies may be mentioned in promotional materials or participation lists before regulatory processes, commercial terms, and internal approvals are locked down. For investors and builders, the practical question becomes whether these entities will move from “consideration” to concrete deliverables such as issuance participation, redemption access, or reserve-related responsibilities.

It also raises the likelihood that Open Standard’s roster could change as plans are translated into compliance-ready operating structures—especially given South Korea’s still-evolving legal landscape for digital assets.

Why South Korea’s pending stablecoin law complicates commitments

Stablecoin issuance and ecosystem participation in South Korea remain constrained by policy uncertainty. The country has not yet passed the Digital Asset Basic Act, leaving open questions about who can issue stablecoins and what roles non-issuers and participating firms may perform.

Cointelegraph has previously reported that lawmakers are debating whether stablecoin issuance should be limited to banks or opened to qualified non-bank issuers, with the broader regulatory framework still under discussion. As long as that process remains unresolved, companies may hesitate to commit to initiatives that depend on licensing, reserve management rules, and the permitted scope of activities for different types of institutions.

That uncertainty can delay integrations and reduce the reliability of public participation lists. Even when major names are mentioned, compliance timelines and approval hurdles can force a slower, more cautious path—particularly for projects that connect traditional finance and payments infrastructure to on-chain settlement.

Open Standard’s mint-and-redeem model still faces skepticism

Alongside corporate clarifications, industry figures have questioned whether Open Standard’s economics are sustainable. Open Standard previously said participating businesses would be able to mint and redeem OUSD without fees or volume limits, and it also described plans to share earnings generated from reserves with participants.

Cointelegraph noted earlier that Circle CEO Jeremy Allaire challenged the model’s durability, specifically questioning the logic of free, unlimited minting and redemption. Lorenzo Valente, director of research at ARK Invest, also characterized the announcement as a “giant” letter of intent.

While such critiques do not necessarily disprove the project, they underscore that stablecoin economics—especially those involving reserve yields, operational costs, redemption incentives, and governance—are often the deciding factor in whether participation scales beyond initial pilots. The tension here is straightforward: an approach designed to reduce friction for users may shift financial responsibilities elsewhere, requiring careful reserve and risk management to stay viable.

For market participants, Upbit’s position is another reminder to separate marketing claims from operational reality. Even if a project advertises broad participation, the sustainability of the underlying business model and the readiness of the legal framework will likely determine who can actually play active roles.

What to watch next is whether South Korea’s Digital Asset Basic Act—and the specific stablecoin issuance rules it implies—moves from debate toward implementation. In parallel, observe whether Open Standard converts “signed up to use” lists into clearly defined, compliant roles for identified entities, including in South Korea.

Europe’s securities regulator has warned that prediction market contracts offered in the European Union could already fall under existing financial rules, potentially triggering a long-standing retail ban on binary options.

According to the European Securities and Markets Authority (ESMA), firms offering event-based contracts in the European Union must assess whether those products qualify as financial instruments under the Markets in Financial Instruments Directive II (MiFID II). If they do, the regulator said, the EU’s retail restrictions on binary options introduced in 2018 would automatically apply.

The July 3 statement does not introduce new legislation. Instead, ESMA clarified that the existing regulatory framework may already cover some prediction market products currently being marketed in Europe. The guidance is directed both at firms and national regulators responsible for supervising financial markets across the bloc.

Existing MiFID II rules could already apply

Under ESMA’s interpretation, companies cannot simply describe contracts as prediction markets or event contracts without considering whether they meet the legal definition of a financial instrument under MiFID II. Where that threshold is met, the binary options restrictions adopted by the regulator in 2018 would take effect without any additional rulemaking.

The clarification arrives as offshore prediction market operators continue drawing regulatory attention across multiple jurisdictions. Among the largest providers, Polymarket operates from offshore markets, while Kalshi and Crypto.com are regulated by the U.S. Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) in the United States. None of the major platforms currently operates a licensed prediction market business within the European Union.

The regulatory update also follows recent scrutiny surrounding Polymarket. The platform was recently accused of using deceptive advertising that targeted U.S. users, adding to regulatory pressure already facing prediction market operators in several countries.

European scrutiny has intensified across multiple countries

Before ESMA issued its clarification, several European authorities had already taken action against prediction market platforms.

Spain’s Ministry of Consumer Affairs temporarily blocked Kalshi and Polymarket on May 26 after determining that the platforms did not hold the gambling licenses required under Spanish law.

A few weeks later, on June 19, gambling regulators from nine European countries, including Belgium, France, Germany and Spain, issued a joint statement warning consumers about unlicensed gambling websites operating across Europe. According to the participating authorities, those platforms raised consumer protection concerns ahead of the FIFA World Cup.

Outside Europe, legal challenges have also continued. Last month, the Kentucky government filed a lawsuit against Polymarket and Kalshi, alleging the platforms were facilitating illegal sports betting within the state.

Against that backdrop, ESMA’s latest statement places fresh responsibility on firms considering expansion into the European market. According to the regulator, companies must determine not only whether their contracts qualify as financial instruments under MiFID II, but also whether national laws classify those products as gambling activities.

Because no major prediction market operator currently runs a licensed European business, ESMA’s clarification comes before any large-scale launch rather than after one.

Firms that fail to address both financial market rules and national gambling requirements could face enforcement action similar to the measures already taken by Spanish authorities, based on the regulator’s guidance and recent actions by national authorities.

Bitcoin (BTC) has added another bear-market bottom signal this month as analysis draws comparisons to November 2022.

Key points:

• Bitcoin adds to its list of bear-market bottom signals with a key supply ratio “buy” trigger.
• A bear-market floor could still be some time off, analysis says, with supply held at a loss still relatively low.
• Demand is the missing piece of the puzzle to shore up a bullish rebound.

Bitcoin profit metric echoes 2022 bear-market bottom zone

In a blog post on Friday, crypto analyst Axel Adler Jr., a contributor to onchain analytics platform CryptoQuant, confirmed the return of a key Bitcoin buy signal.

Advanced Net UTXO Supply Ratio, which measures the proportion of the BTC supply which last moved in profit or loss, is back in negative territory for the first time in nearly four years.

“The ratio dropped into deeply negative territory and then crossed back above the signal threshold on the rebound, which caused the model to print BUY on several sessions in late June and early July,” Adler wrote. 

“This is the first buy trigger since November 2022, which was the bottom of the previous bear cycle.”

Bitcoin Advanced Net UTXO Supply Ratio. Source: CryptoQuant

UTXO Supply Ratio cues do not imply that a macro bottom has arrived, but occur “near cyclical lows.”

“Confirmation would be the ratio holding above zero together with rising price. The negative scenario is a move back into negative territory without price support,” Adler explained.

A missing piece of the puzzle involves supply being held at a loss, which has not yet reached the levels seen during previous bear markets.

Adler forecast that the 90-day simple moving average (SMA) of supply in loss should hit its bear-market reversal target within two months.

“Until then, it is more accurate to treat capitulation as a process rather than a completed fact,” he continued.

Bitcoin supply in loss. Source: CryptoQuant

Signals will not “stop BTC from going lower”

On the topic of UTXO Supply, fellow CryptoQuant contributor Darkfost also eyed a potential market inflection point this week.

Related: Bitcoin bear market ‘dead’ after first TD9 reversal signal since July 2022 fires

“Since it depends on the profit and loss of UTXOs, it can very well signal something during either a sharp drop or a sharp rise. That said, in terms of cyclicality, it wouldn’t be inconsistent to think that the end of this bear market could be approaching,” he wrote in a Quicktake blog post on Wednesday. 

“This won’t stop BTC from going lower, but we now have several signals pointing to seller exhaustion. The next step is a renewal of demand, and that could take some time.”

As Cointelegraph reported, BTC price expectations tend to favor a bear-market bottom coming in Q3 or later.

Senator Kirsten Gillibrand, one of the US lawmakers behind negotiations for a digital asset market structure bill in Congress, has proposed barring elected officials and the president from issuing or sponsoring their own tokens, citing President Donald Trump’s and First Lady Melania Trump’s memecoins.

In a Friday notice, Gillibrand said that Congress should support measures barring elected officials and their spouses from “issuing or sponsoring their own digital assets.” The New York lawmaker said that the proposed restriction would include any US president and their spouse, but did not specifically mention extending the provision to the office of the vice president or other members of their families. 

“This is a commonsense requirement that should get broad bipartisan support – public officials and their spouses should not be issuing memecoins,” said Gillibrand. “We cannot let self-dealing destroy an opportunity to strengthen consumer protections, crack down on illicit finance, and expand economic opportunity for the millions of Americans our financial system has left behind.”

Source: Kirsten Gillibrand

Gillibrand is one of the lawmakers behind negotiations regarding the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act in the Senate, legislation which has faced delays due to concerns about ethics, tokenization and stablecoin rewards. Although she expected the chamber to vote on the bill by the Senate’s August state work period, she added that no one would vote for the bill without addressing ethics, citing the potential of elected officials “[getting] rich off of these industries because of their insider status.”

Related: Senate Dems urge probe into $500M crypto deal between Trumps, UAE 

During consideration of the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins Act (GENIUS Act) in 2025, the New York lawmaker said senators had removed provisions specifically targeting Trump’s ties to the crypto industry, including his memecoin Official Trump (TRUMP). 

She said at the time that the memecoin was likely “illegal based on current law,” but addressing all of Trump’s ethics problems would make for a “very long and detailed bill.” Trump signed the GENIUS Act into law in July 2025.

Notably, Gillibrand’s proposed memecoin restriction did not appear to extend to other family members. In addition to his personal investments in the crypto industry, Trump has faced criticism over his sons’ involvement in the crypto platform World Liberty Financial and their Bitcoin (BTC) mining company American Bitcoin.

Trump brushes off conflicts of interest concerns with crypto industry

This week, Trump reported that he earned about $1.4 billion from crypto ventures the same year he took office. The financial windfall occurred while he was in a position to influence legislation on digital assets, including the GENIUS Act and the CLARITY Act.

According to Trump, there was “nothing illegal” and “nothing wrong” with profiting from his investments as president, while he did not directly answer questions about perceived conflicts of interest.

Magazine: The end of anonymity? AI could unmask crypto’s hidden identities