Movement Labs, the team behind the Movement Ethereum layer-2 network, has filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection in the United States, according to court records. The filing places the company under court supervision as it restructures following a series of controversies around the launch of the MOVE token and subsequent corporate disruptions.

The petition was submitted on July 15 in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for the District of Delaware under Subchapter V, a streamlined reorganization route available to qualifying small businesses. If approved, Subchapter V can allow a business to continue operating while it works toward a plan for creditors.

Key takeaways

• Movement Labs filed Chapter 11 under Subchapter V on July 15, with operations continuing during restructuring under court oversight.
• The court approved interim measures including retention of bank accounts/cash management and permission to pursue debtor-in-possession financing.
• Creditors have until Sept. 14 to submit claims related to the bankruptcy.
• Move Industries CEO Torab Torabi says the bankruptcy is limited to Movement Labs, while Move Industries continues operating normally.
• The move comes after months of fallout tied to MOVE’s launch, a market-making dispute, and exchange delistings that contributed to a major decline in token value.

Chapter 11 filing under Subchapter V

Court documents show that Movement Labs, Inc. sought Chapter 11 protection on July 15 using Subchapter V, which is designed to streamline reorganizations for certain small businesses. That status is significant for stakeholders because it can change the pace and structure of the restructuring process compared with a traditional Chapter 11 case.

Following the filing, the court granted interim requests that allow Movement Labs to maintain its bank accounts and cash management systems. The court also approved the company’s ability to obtain debtor-in-possession (DIP) financing, a common mechanism in Chapter 11 cases that helps fund operations while a debtor reorganizes.

For creditors and counterparties, timing matters. The court set a claims deadline of Sept. 14, giving parties a defined window to file claims tied to Movement Labs’ bankruptcy.

Move Industries says it is not covered

After the bankruptcy filing became public, Move Industries CEO Torab Torabi addressed the situation on X. According to Torabi’s statement, the Chapter 11 filing applies only to Movement Labs.

Torabi also said Move Industries—an entity that took over development and operations of the Movement ecosystem from Movement Labs in December 2025—continues to operate normally.

The distinction is important to users and developers because it suggests the broader ecosystem stewardship may not be directly suspended by Movement Labs’ restructuring. However, readers should still watch for how responsibilities, funding, and contractual relationships between the entities are handled during the bankruptcy process.

Earlier coverage from Movement’s community materials indicates the handoff occurred as part of a broader operational transition. Torabi’s post points to that separation as a reason investors should not automatically assume the entire Movement network is winding down.

Market-making controversy and exchange action preceded the filing

Movement Labs’ bankruptcy arrives after months of turmoil surrounding the MOVE token launch and a controversial market-making agreement. Cointelegraph previously reported that Movement Labs suspended co-founder Rushi Manche in May 2025 in connection with a deal he helped broker with Web3Port.

According to that earlier reporting, the market maker received 66 million MOVE—about 5% of the token’s supply—and later sold the holdings. The arrangement drew scrutiny after it reportedly exerted significant downward pressure on the token price, and an independent investigation was launched.

Cointelegraph also reported that Coinbase suspended MOVE trading later in May 2025 after determining the token no longer met its listing standards, with the market-making review ongoing at the time.

Those steps—suspension of a co-founder, ongoing investigation, and an exchange delisting—formed a damaging sequence that affected both market confidence and liquidity. A Chapter 11 filing typically signals that the financial and operational strain from such disruptions can no longer be contained internally.

Token collapse underscores the pressure on the project

The filing is occurring against a backdrop of a steep decline in MOVE’s market value. Cointelegraph’s source material notes that MOVE has fallen by more than 94% over the past year to roughly $0.01. While token price alone is not proof of bankruptcy, it often reflects a wider loss of trust, reduced trading activity, and potentially diminished revenue for token-linked business operations.

For market participants, the deeper implication is less about the immediate price reaction and more about what bankruptcy means for governance, funding, and stakeholder claims. In restructurings like this, creditors may seek repayment through settlement terms or equity arrangements depending on the company’s assets and liabilities—details that typically emerge gradually as the case proceeds.

What to watch next

Movement Labs’ restructuring plan and DIP financing terms will likely be the next decisive signals for investors and ecosystem participants. Readers should also monitor whether the separation from Move Industries remains operational in practice—especially around access to resources, continuity of development, and how any claims tied to past token-related controversies are handled.

Bitcoin’s move above $66,000 has lifted CRCL, BMNR and MSTR by as much as 8.6% as investors position for the Federal Reserve’s July meeting.

According to data from crypto.news, Bitcoin climbed past $66,000 on July 21, while Ethereum traded above $1,900 and XRP recovered beyond $1.14. The combined value of all cryptocurrencies increased 2.08% within 24 hours to reach $2.26 trillion.

Stocks tied to digital assets followed the market higher during Tuesday’s session. Circle Internet Group gained 8.6%, BitMine Immersion Technologies advanced 3.61%, and Strategy rose 4.22%, according to the daily TradingView charts supplied with the report.

Investor interest also increased as U.S. lawmakers moved closer to establishing clearer rules for digital assets. As such, expectations surrounding the CLARITY Act supported companies with direct exposure to cryptocurrency prices, stablecoin activity and corporate crypto holdings.

Crypto strength has lifted all three stocks

Circle Internet Group recorded the largest gain among the three companies, with CRCL closing at $71.08 after opening at $68.94. TradingView data showed that the stock reached an intraday high of $72.68 and a low of $68.65 before ending the session 8.6% higher.

CRCL also moved above the upper boundary of a descending channel that had controlled its price since early June. The supplied daily chart places the former channel resistance near $65, making that level the first area buyers may need to defend if the breakout faces a retest.

Momentum indicators support the recovery, although money flow remains a concern. CRCL’s Aroon Up reading reached 85.71%, while Aroon Down fell to zero, which the TradingView chart identifies as stronger upward momentum; however, the Chaikin Money Flow reading remained negative at -0.25, showing that buying pressure has not yet produced sustained capital inflows.

Based on the visible chart structure, the next resistance range sits between $75 and $80. A move back below the broken channel boundary near $65 would weaken the breakout, while the recent base around $60 provides the next visible support area.

BitMine Immersion Technologies closed at $17.23, rising 3.61% after trading between $16.69 and $17.24. The advance came as investors assessed BitMine’s latest Ethereum purchases and its share-repurchase program ahead of the Fed meeting.

According to the company figures cited in the report, BitMine acquired another 7,430 ETH during the week, raising its holdings to 5.78 million tokens. The company has staked 4.92 million ETH, equal to about 85% of its Ethereum treasury, while its combined crypto assets, cash, and investments stood at $11.5 billion.

BitMine also repurchased 5.5 million shares at an average price of $15.62, according to the same company update. Its daily chart showed BMNR breaking above a descending trendline that had capped the stock since May, while the price also crossed the Supertrend level at $16.53.

BMNR’s Relative Strength Index rose to 58.71, compared with its signal average of 47.17, according to TradingView. Since the RSI remains below the 70 overbought threshold, the indicator leaves room for an advance toward the visible $18 resistance, followed by the previous consolidation area near $20; a close below $16.53 would weaken the reversal setup, with additional support shown at $13.83.

Strategy shares ended Tuesday at $101.95 after rising 4.22%, TradingView data showed. MSTR traded as high as $104.60 and briefly fell to $99.95, but buyers returned around the psychologically important $100 level before the close.

Michael Saylor disclosed that Strategy increased its U.S. dollar reserves by $225 million, bringing the company’s cash reserve to $3.2 billion. The report also placed Strategy’s Bitcoin holdings at 843,775 BTC, keeping MSTR closely exposed to changes in the cryptocurrency’s market value.

Fed guidance will test the new breakouts

MSTR has reclaimed the Bollinger Bands midpoint at $94.79 and is approaching the upper band at $105.36, according to the supplied daily chart. A confirmed move above that upper boundary could open the area around $110, while a rejection would keep $100 and the middle band near $95 as the first support levels.

Despite Tuesday’s recovery, MSTR’s Average Directional Index stood at 18.77. TradingView’s indicator reading shows that the stock does not yet have a strong directional trend, leaving the breakout vulnerable if Bitcoin loses momentum or the Fed delivers a more restrictive policy message.

The Federal Reserve is scheduled to meet on July 28 and 29, with markets expecting policymakers to leave interest rates unchanged, according to the report. Investors will instead examine Chair Kevin Warsh’s comments for clues about inflation, economic growth and the timing of future policy changes.

A balanced policy message could help Bitcoin and crypto-linked equities preserve Tuesday’s gains. More hawkish guidance could encourage profit-taking, placing CRCL’s channel breakout, BMNR’s Supertrend reversal and MSTR’s recovery above $100 under immediate pressure.

Dollar-backed stablecoins are becoming a new channel for “digital dollarization” that BIS researchers say is largely resistant to capital controls—especially in emerging markets where households and businesses already face currency and access constraints.

In a study released by the Bank for International Settlements (BIS), researchers compared foreign-currency bank deposits with inflows into dollar-pegged stablecoins across more than 130 economies. They found that both measures tend to rise during macroeconomic stress, but stablecoin flows react far less to capital controls and other FX restrictions—an asymmetry the authors attribute to stablecoins circulating “partly outside the regulatory perimeter.”

Key takeaways

• BIS research links both foreign-currency deposits and dollar-pegged stablecoin inflows to periods of macroeconomic stress.
• Stablecoin inflows appear far less sensitive to capital controls than traditional foreign-currency deposits.
• That resilience could limit policymakers’ ability to curb stablecoin adoption using tools designed for the banking system.
• BIS reports limited evidence that deposit dollarization weakens monetary policy transmission, though higher foreign-currency deposits correlate with greater inflation risk.
• The study suggests financial-stability regulation may need updating as tokenized assets expand beyond existing oversight structures.

Digital dollarization beyond traditional banking channels

BIS researchers frame stablecoins as potentially creating a parallel dollar-use ecosystem. Their analysis draws a comparison between two ways residents can move into foreign currency: by holding bank deposits denominated in foreign exchange and by holding dollar-pegged stablecoins.

According to the BIS study, both categories increase during periods of macroeconomic stress. That finding aligns with a common pattern in emerging-market finance: when local currencies weaken and uncertainty rises, demand for dollar assets often grows.

The important difference is how each channel responds to government attempts to restrict cross-border capital movement. The BIS team reports that stablecoin inflows show little reaction to capital controls or other FX restrictions, while foreign-currency deposits behave more like a traditional financial variable—tending to reflect policy measures more directly.

The authors argue this divergence is likely because stablecoins can circulate outside the regulatory perimeter. In practice, that means stablecoin adoption may not map neatly onto the same enforcement mechanisms used for bank deposits or conventional foreign-currency flows.

Why capital controls may be less effective with stablecoins

Capital controls and FX restrictions are designed to influence the movement of funds across borders and within domestic financial systems. BIS’s findings suggest that when a new, tokenized “dollar” route emerges, those tools can lose traction.

The study does not claim stablecoins are immune to every policy influence. Rather, it highlights reduced responsiveness in stablecoin flows relative to traditional foreign-currency deposits. For policymakers, that raises a practical question: how much of financial stability management still depends on the banking system being the main gateway for dollarization?

BIS also warns that stablecoins could undermine monetary sovereignty even if inflation dynamics remain similar in some cases. The concern is that households and businesses may shift into dollar exposure outside the banking system, particularly where local currencies are fragile or access to reliable financial services is limited.

Monetary policy transmission and inflation risk remain mixed

While the BIS study raises sovereignty questions, it also includes a more nuanced assessment of monetary policy effectiveness. The researchers report little evidence that dollarization via deposits weakens monetary policy transmission.

However, the study notes that countries with higher levels of foreign-currency deposits faced a somewhat greater risk of elevated inflation. That distinction matters because it suggests the impact of dollarization on macro outcomes may depend on structure and context—even if stablecoins and deposits are both dollar-linked.

For investors and risk managers, the takeaway is that “digital dollarization” may not automatically translate into immediate policy failure, but it can still complicate how central banks gauge demand for foreign-currency assets and anticipate pressure points in financial stability.

Regulators may need new tools for a tokenized financial system

BIS concludes that policymakers may need updated instruments to manage financial stability as stablecoin usage grows. The argument is not simply that stablecoins are “new,” but that existing regulations built for traditional banks and foreign-currency deposits may be less effective when the dollar exposure is tokenized and potentially distributed across channels that fall outside established compliance boundaries.

That becomes especially relevant as stablecoins are increasingly used for payments in emerging markets. In such settings, stablecoin adoption can be driven not only by speculative motives, but by operational realities—cross-border transfer speed, remittance costs, and persistent gaps in access to foreign exchange.

Stablecoin adoption is already spreading for payments and cross-border use

The BIS analysis arrives as other institutions document rising stablecoin use in the real economy. In a separate assessment focused on Nigeria, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) found that households and small businesses use US dollar-pegged stablecoins for cross-border payments, remittances, and access to dollar-denominated assets. The IMF attributed demand to factors such as inflation, currency depreciation, and limited access to foreign exchange.

In that IMF report, stablecoins were described as reducing the time and cost of moving money across borders while expanding access to financial services for users outside the traditional banking system. At the same time, the IMF warned that broader adoption of dollar-backed tokens could weaken monetary sovereignty by reducing demand for local currency and moving more financial activity outside conventional banking channels.

Beyond Africa, stablecoin payments have also accelerated in Latin America. Bitso Business, the enterprise payments arm of crypto exchange Bitso, reported an 81% year-over-year increase in stablecoin payment volume during the first half of 2026. The company also said that Circle’s USDC and Tether’s USDT made up 40% of all crypto purchases in the region in 2025, surpassing Bitcoin for the first time.

Separately, broader market data points to the scale of this shift. Stablecoin market capitalization has reportedly risen to about $309.7 billion, up from roughly $260 billion a year earlier, according to the figures cited in the original reporting and shown via DefiLlama’s stablecoin data.

For markets, the key question now is how policymakers will respond if stablecoin flows keep behaving differently than foreign-currency deposits. BIS’s evidence suggests traditional capital-control playbooks may be less effective, so the next watch items are regulatory measures that target tokenized dollar access directly—and whether stablecoin adoption continues to decouple from FX restrictions across more jurisdictions.

The White House has reportedly reached an agreement on ethics language for the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act, a US crypto market-structure bill currently awaiting a possible Senate vote. The development is framed as a potential pathway to secure support from at least some Democratic lawmakers—an outcome that could prove decisive in a chamber where passage may require broad consensus.

According to a Tuesday report from Punchbowl, White House officials met with Republican Senators Cynthia Lummis and Bernie Moreno to align on the bill’s ethics provisions. Neither senator has publicly detailed the terms of the understanding, but the report suggested the outcome could also influence how US President Donald Trump’s crypto-related investments are viewed politically.

Key takeaways

• The White House is reportedly working to finalize ethics language in the CLARITY Act after meetings with Sen. Cynthia Lummis and Sen. Bernie Moreno.
• Support from some Democrats would matter because the Senate is expected to face a tight decision and likely needs 60 votes for passage.
• Many Democrats have previously indicated that CLARITY would be “worthless” without ethics provisions addressing conflicts they associate with Trump’s connections to the crypto industry.
• While the House passed CLARITY in July 2025, delays tied to shutdowns and unresolved policy questions have kept the Senate process uncertain.

Why ethics language has become the gatekeeper

The CLARITY Act has been positioned as a major effort to establish market-structure rules for crypto in the United States. The House passed the bill in July 2025 as part of Republicans’ “Crypto Week” agenda, but its Senate timeline has been complicated by multiple delays. The reported sticking points have ranged from lawmakers’ concerns over ethics to questions around tokenization and stablecoin-related rewards, alongside calls to protect developers from potential enforcement actions.

The central political friction in the Senate appears to be ethics and conflict-of-interest concerns, particularly as they relate to the Trump administration. Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph noted that Trump urged the Senate to pass CLARITY “in honor of” the late Senator Lindsey Graham, who the president said was a major supporter of the bill.

Still, several Senate Democrats have been explicit that they will not treat the legislation as complete without additional safeguards. According to Cointelegraph reporting, Senators including Elizabeth Warren, Chris Murphy, Jeff Merkley, and Chris Van Hollen said that any CLARITY bill would be “worthless” without ethics provisions addressing potential conflicts they believe stem from Trump’s ties to the crypto industry, including his memecoin and the family’s World Liberty Financial business.

Unclear vote math as Senate calendar remains unsettled

Even with a reported ethics agreement, it is not yet clear whether CLARITY can secure the 60-vote threshold that typically applies to overcome Senate procedural hurdles. The bill’s prospects hinge on whether enough lawmakers—especially among Democrats—are persuaded that the ethics provisions adequately address their concerns.

As of Tuesday, the congressional calendar reportedly did not show a CLARITY vote, and the bill text had not been made public. That lack of transparency can further complicate support: lawmakers frequently need full access to the exact language before they can credibly assess whether amendments actually address the specific ethics risks they have raised.

Cointelegraph also reported that it requested details of the agreement from Lummis’ office but did not receive an immediate response, underscoring that the negotiation’s specifics remain largely undisclosed to the public.

Administration message: “comprehensive” ethics provisions

While the details of the reported deal have not been released, a White House official told Cointelegraph that the administration is committed to advancing CLARITY and said it had agreed to “the most comprehensive and wide-ranging ethics provision in history.” The official also characterized the process as highly responsive to Democratic concerns, saying the administration had “bent over backward to accommodate [Democrats’] concerns.”

At the same time, opposition has not disappeared. Many Democrats have argued that hearings are necessary to examine Trump’s crypto investments and related connections before any vote. Those calls reflect a broader concern: even if language is improved, lawmakers may still want a formal record and additional scrutiny through hearings to determine whether conflicts persist.

Coinbase vice chair Ryan VanGrack, cited in Cointelegraph reporting, suggested that Democrats have already been able to negotiate customer protection provisions into the Senate version of the bill. However, that progress on one policy area does not appear to have resolved the ethics debate, which remains a key driver of uncertainty.

Crypto market reaction tracks the political development

Bitcoin moved higher during the news cycle, climbing above $66,000 early on Tuesday and reaching a seven-week high, according to Cointelegraph’s coverage. Traders linked the move to reports of an ethics deal and to separate developments involving Trump’s plans to introduce additional 10% international trade tariffs.

In social media commentary, Michaël van de Poppe, founder and chief investment officer of MN Fund and MN Capital, attributed the rally to expectations surrounding potential approval of the CLARITY Act. The observation highlights how tightly some market participants are tying near-term price action to US regulatory and legislative progress, particularly when bills are framed as shaping how crypto markets will operate.

What to watch next

Investors and builders should focus on whether the Senate bill’s text becomes publicly available and whether lawmakers’ concerns—especially around ethics—are reflected in verifiable drafting. The next inflection point is not just whether CLARITY advances procedurally, but whether enough senators are willing to commit before any final vote amid ongoing questions about conflicts and the adequacy of proposed safeguards.