Crypto World
OpenAI, Anthropic push 30-day review for frontier AI models
OpenAI and Anthropic are working together in Washington to shape a federal review system for advanced AI models, despite competing for customers, funding, and technological leadership.
Summary
- OpenAI and Anthropic support up to 30 days of federal access before some frontier model releases.
- The proposed process would apply across the industry, including rivals such as Meta and xAI.
- Federal agencies must develop the framework by Aug. 1 under a June executive order.
- Nvidia, Meta, and Microsoft separately warned against sweeping controls on open-weight AI models.
OpenAI and Anthropic seek common review standards
OpenAI and Anthropic are urging the Trump administration to adopt a consistent review process for AI models with advanced cybersecurity or national security capabilities, according to The Information.
Their cooperation comes before an Aug. 1 deadline for federal agencies to define which systems should qualify as “covered frontier models.” Those models could be provided to the government for evaluation for up to 30 days before release to other trusted partners.
Both companies reportedly want the standards applied across the AI industry rather than limited to developers already cooperating with Washington. That could bring competing companies, including Meta and Elon Musk’s xAI, under the same review framework if their models cross the eventual capability threshold.
The discussions mark a rare policy alignment between OpenAI and Anthropic. Both companies sell general-purpose AI systems and compete for enterprise contracts, researchers, computing capacity, and investment.
Neither company has publicly released the full terms it wants included in the final framework.
Trump order sets voluntary 30-day process
President Donald Trump ordered federal agencies to establish a classified benchmarking process through Executive Order 14409 on June 2.
The order directs the National Security Agency, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, Treasury Department, and other federal bodies to determine when an AI model has capabilities strong enough to warrant additional review.
Developers participating in the framework would be able to ask the government whether a model meets the covered frontier model threshold. They could then provide federal evaluators with access for up to 30 days before making the system available to other approved partners.
The order requires safeguards for intellectual property, confidential information, cybersecurity, and insider threats during the evaluation.
However, it expressly states that the process cannot create mandatory federal licensing, preclearance, or permitting rules for developing or releasing AI models. Companies would therefore participate voluntarily unless separate laws or government powers apply.
US AI developers seek clarity before launches
A shared framework could give US developers clearer standards for deciding when government testing is expected. Questions remain over which technical benchmarks will trigger a review, which agencies will test each system, and how officials will approve early-access partners.
Those uncertainties have already affected recent launches. OpenAI and Anthropic provided government officials with early access to advanced models before wider distribution, but outside researchers had limited visibility into the evaluations.
A July report found that the agencies, tests, and approval requirements involved in those reviews remained unclear. The lack of a published process could make release planning harder for developers and leave smaller AI companies unsure whether the same standards apply to them.
Applying one capability-based threshold to OpenAI, Anthropic, Meta, xAI, and other developers could reduce some of that uncertainty. It could also limit concerns that Washington is giving selected companies different treatment.
Open-weight AI debate divides the industry
OpenAI and Anthropic’s call for a common review process comes as other technology companies are warning Washington against placing broad controls on open-weight AI models.
As crypto.news reported last week, Nvidia, Meta, and Microsoft joined 22 other organizations in an open letter arguing that sweeping restrictions could weaken US leadership as competition with China intensifies. IBM, Palantir, Mistral, Hugging Face, Mozilla, Andreessen Horowitz, and the Linux Foundation also signed the letter.
The group called for targeted legal and commercial measures against misuse instead of restrictions covering technologies with legitimate research and business applications.
Open-weight models allow companies, researchers, and governments to download software, modify it, and run it on their own infrastructure. Supporters say this gives users greater control over their data, security, and computing systems while lowering deployment costs.
The signatories did not frame open and closed models as mutually exclusive. Instead, they argued that both approaches are needed to support competition and give developers different ways to build and deploy AI systems.
Nvidia CEO Jensen Huang shared the letter in his first post on X and defended the role of both development models.
“The world needs both frontier closed models and frontier open models.”
Elon Musk also supported the letter in a reply to Huang, although his AI company, xAI, was not listed among the 25 reported signatories.
The two efforts address different parts of the policy debate. OpenAI and Anthropic are seeking consistent federal evaluations for models that cross a national security capability threshold, while the open letter argues against restrictions based mainly on whether a model makes its weights available.
Federal agencies now have until Aug. 1 to define the frontier-model threshold and outline the voluntary review process. The final framework will show whether Washington focuses on measurable capabilities or applies broader conditions based on how AI models are distributed.
AmericanFortress, a blockchain security company, has proposed a cryptographic approach aimed at making today’s cryptocurrency wallets more resilient to potential future quantum attacks—without asking users to move funds, rotate keys, or change their wallet addresses.
In a technical paper posted to the Cryptography ePrint Archive, the company describes how it would add post-quantum protections while keeping wallet address formats intact. The work is positioned as compatible with seed-based hierarchical deterministic (HD) wallets commonly used across networks that rely on elliptic-curve cryptography.
Key takeaways
- AmericanFortress says its scheme can preserve existing wallet addresses while layering post-quantum verification into the system.
- The approach leverages zero-knowledge proofs derived from a wallet’s seed phrase, rather than replacing the underlying elliptic-curve cryptography.
- The paper is published on ePrint and has not been peer-reviewed.
- Other teams are pursuing different post-quantum paths, including hardware-based quantum-resistant signing for EVM wallets.
Preserving wallet addresses while adding post-quantum safeguards
AmericanFortress’s proposal is laid out in a paper available on the Cryptography ePrint Archive (https://eprint.iacr.org/2026/1508). The company frames its central goal as reducing the friction of post-quantum migration: if quantum-capable attackers ever become capable of breaking elliptic-curve cryptography, wallets would ideally upgrade their security properties without forcing users to transfer funds to new addresses.
According to the paper, the scheme is designed to fit seed-based HD wallet constructions—structures that generate many addresses and keys from a single seed phrase. AmericanFortress says the mechanism is compatible with wallets used across ecosystems such as Bitcoin, Ethereum, and Solana, alongside other networks that depend on elliptic-curve cryptography.
The proposal does not rely on discarding the existing elliptic-curve-based key material. Instead, it introduces an additional verification layer: nodes would validate zero-knowledge proofs built from the wallet’s original seed phrase. Meanwhile, users would continue signing transactions using their current keys.
That distinction matters for practicality. Most post-quantum strategies require some form of migration—new address types, new key formats, or user actions that can be costly, operationally risky, or confusing at scale. AmericanFortress’s approach aims to shift the burden toward network-side verification rather than user-side replacement.
Why the focus on quantum readiness is accelerating
AmericanFortress’s paper ties its motivation to widely discussed concerns about cryptographic longevity. While quantum computers capable of breaking elliptic-curve cryptography do not exist today, researchers generally agree that sufficiently powerful systems could eventually render current elliptic-curve protections unreliable.
The company also cites an analysis from Bloomberg estimating that up to $470 billion in Bitcoin could be at risk in a scenario where sufficiently powerful quantum computers become available. Although such estimates depend on assumptions about adversarial capability and timeline, they underscore why the industry is working on “future-proofing” now rather than waiting for an end-game scenario to arrive.
In the meantime, multiple blockchain and research efforts have begun mapping migration routes. The paper situates AmericanFortress’s proposal alongside those broader efforts by aiming to minimize disruptions for end users—an especially sensitive constraint for wallet designs that must handle large volumes of legacy addresses and long-lived funds.
Hardware and account-level upgrades pursue other routes
AmericanFortress is not the only participant in the post-quantum wallet security race. On Tuesday, Freedom Factory introduced PQ1, which it describes as a post-quantum hardware wallet for Ethereum and other Ethereum Virtual Machine (EVM)-compatible networks.
Where AmericanFortress’s approach is software-based and seeks compatibility with existing wallet address structures, PQ1 relies on post-quantum cryptographic signatures produced within dedicated hardware. Freedom Factory says the wallet uses SPHINCS+C10 signatures and is designed to secure transactions via ERC-4337 smart accounts.
The difference highlights a fundamental tension in post-quantum planning: some strategies aim to retrofit protection into the present without changing addresses, while others focus on moving security to new cryptographic primitives—often with hardware or account-system changes to manage complexity. For users, these distinctions can determine whether upgrades feel like an update or like a migration.
What broader initiatives suggest about the next migration steps
Industry momentum toward quantum resistance is visible across multiple ecosystems. In recent months, a Strategy-led consortium pledged $15 million to fund Bitcoin quantum security research. Meanwhile, the Ethereum Foundation published a proposal outlining a path for migrating accounts to quantum-resistant cryptography. Separately, Algorand has stated plans to introduce quantum-resistant accounts by 2027.
Taken together, these efforts suggest that different networks are converging on the same problem—protecting cryptographic guarantees in a post-quantum world—but not converging on a single technical method. Some will emphasize protocol-level migration, others will rely on account abstraction, and others will attempt compatibility layers that reduce changes for users.
For readers tracking practical progress, the key question is how proposals like AmericanFortress’s would be integrated at the network level: whether nodes can verify the required zero-knowledge proofs efficiently, how the scheme would be standardized, and what changes would be needed for wallet software and transaction formats to support broader adoption.
As post-quantum work shifts from theory to implementations, watch for how (and how quickly) cryptographic proposals move from ePrint into peer review, prototype testing, and—crucially—real protocol or client integrations. Even if quantum threats remain hypothetical in the near term, the winners will likely be the approaches that minimize operational disruption while remaining verifiable at scale.
Visa said it is investing across the stablecoin stack, highlighting OpenUSD, tokenized deposits and AI-powered commerce during the company’s third-quarter earnings call.
XRP is trading at around the $1.06 price level, down more than 4% since yesterday. The setup remains as unstable as it looks. Price is compressing inside a tight range with no clear resolution. Bulls and bears both have a case, and whichever side breaks first could trigger the next meaningful move.
The main near-term narrative remains spot ETF inflows optimism. That expectation has helped support sentiment despite recent price weakness. Meanwhile, price differences across exchanges reflect uneven liquidity rather than a clear market direction.
Speculative forecasts of $5 XRP by late 2025 continue circulating on social media. However, those projections remain opinion, not evidence. For now, traders are paying closer attention to price structure than long-term predictions.
Technically, the key support sits around $1.05. A decisive break below that level could expose the psychological $1.00 area. If buyers continue defending support, the current range may tighten until either ETF developments or a shift in market sentiment forces a breakout.
Discover: The Best Crypto to Diversify Your Portfolio
Can XRP Price Reclaim $1.20 Before the ETF Decision Lands?
At its current $1.06 price level, XRP is sitting near the lower edge of its recent consolidation range. Recent support around $1.08 to $1.10 has already given way, leaving the near-term structure looking more cautious. Trading volume remains steady rather than explosive, suggesting buyers have not returned with conviction.
The bullish scenario remains straightforward. XRP needs to reclaim $1.10 with strong volume before buyers can target the $1.20 to $1.25 resistance zone. Spot ETF optimism continues supporting sentiment, but traders still need confirmation from price before calling for a sustained breakout.
The base case still favors consolidation. XRP could continue trading between $1.05 and $1.10 while investors digest macro developments and regulatory headlines. That would leave neither bulls nor bears with a decisive advantage, extending the current period of indecision.
The bearish case begins with a confirmed daily close below $1.05. If that level fails, the next meaningful demand zone sits around $1.00, followed by $0.95 if selling accelerates. Momentum indicators still lack a clear directional signal, making any breakout likely to be sharp once volatility returns.
Trade Ripple XRP on Bybit and Get a Chance to Win Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop
Maxi Doge Targets Early Mover Upside as XRP Tests Key Levels
XRP at current levels offers a known asset with a known ceiling. The upside math from $1.06 to even $2.00 is roughly a double, and that requires flawless ETF execution, sustained institutional flows, and cooperative macro. That’s not a bad trade. It’s just not an asymmetric one.
Traders hunting for the kind of outsized return profiles that don’t depend on a $69 billion market cap re-rating tend to look earlier in the cycle. And that’s the structural argument for Maxi Doge ($MAXI), an ERC-20 meme token built around a 240-lb canine mascot and a community culture centered on high-conviction trading.
The project has raised $4.8 million at a current presale price of $0.0002831, with dynamic APY staking already live. The token’s mechanics include holder-only trading competitions with leaderboard rewards, a Maxi Fund treasury managing liquidity and partnerships, and meme-first marketing that’s earned genuine traction in trading communities rather than just ad spend.
The tagline “never skip leg-day, never skip a pump” is stupid in the best possible way, and that’s intentional. For traders sizing a small speculative allocation, research Maxi Doge before the presale window closes.
Discover: The Best Token Presales
The post XRP Price Caught in Volatile Range, With Both Sides Ready For a Violent Coil appeared first on Cryptonews.
It appears that essentially all relief rallies in the cryptocurrency markets over the past few months have been precisely that, as the firepower is simply not sufficient to provide enough force to change the bearish trend.
The latest such example took place at the beginning of the current business week, as bitcoin was rejected after its push to $65,600 and dropped to a ten-day low of $63,000. Here are some of the potential reasons behind this.
FOMC Uncertainty
Given the timing of this correction, the most obvious first reason appears to be macro, as tomorrow is the next Federal Reserve FOMC meeting. Although the US central bank is widely expected to leave the federal funds rate unchanged at 3.50%-3.75%, this is shaping to be one of the least predictable decisions in recent years.
Markets, experts, and prediction platforms recently assigned roughly a one-in-three chance to a surprise rate increase as policymakers continue to confront persistent inflationary pressures. Although the CPI data for June was a lot lower than expected, the general consensus is that the reading was slightly misleading and perhaps a one-off.
Investors will closely watch and examine Chairman Kevin Warsh’s press conference for clues about the central bank’s approach during the remainder of the year. Bitcoin, altcoins, and other speculative assets tend to struggle when investors are uncertain about the direction of interest rates. Higher borrowing costs and rising real yields make risk-free assets more attractive, and vice versa.
As such, the first reason appears to be investors and traders de-risking before the key economic event.
Broader Market Crash
Bitcoin is not isolated from the other markets, especially those also considered risk-on. As such, whenever there are big moves in those, it tends to follow along (or sometimes lead). The past 24-36 hours have been quite painful for Asian stocks, for example. South Korea’s KOSPI has plummeted by double digits, going down from 6,767 to 6,023.
Japan’s Nikkei 225 has slipped by over 4% within the same timeframe, dipping from 64,800 to 62,365. The situation in the US was not much more positive. Although the actual big indexes remained flat, some of the most prominent names, such as Nvidia and Micron, posted painful losses of up to 5%.
Last but not least was gold. The precious metal peaked at almost $4,120 yesterday, but it was rejected and dumped by just over $100 in hours.
ETF Outflows
We will list this as the third and last major reason because the actual outflow value was not as significant as it used to be during the June crash, for example. Yes, Monday was another day in the red, but the net outflows remained at under $12 million. This is essentially nothing compared to the $100 million+ withdrawals investors made regularly last month.
Nevertheless, it still continued a red streak that began last Thursday when the funds lost $225 million and on Friday when the outflows topped $240 million.
What’s Next?
Ali Martinez warned earlier today that the Bitcoin 3-day Bollinger bands have squeezed tightly, which generally precedes major price moves. The last few months have been quite dull in terms of volatility, and he noted that such periods are “often followed by a major price expansion.”
Ted Pillows believes the next big support for BTC remains at $62,000, which, if broken to the downside, will lead to a very dark future and perhaps another leg down to under $60,000.
On the more positive side, CW added that certain whales are “rapidly recovering their selling volume following the decline,” which could lead to a short-term bounce off. Additionally, the analyst claimed that there are no major sell walls on bitcoin’s path forward if it indeed rebounds soon.
These technical tools will definitely be used to watch, but the most important factor remains tomorrow’s FOMC meeting. BTC is likely to experience some heightened short-term volatility, no matter what the decision is.
The post 3 Reasons Why Bitcoin Crashed to a 10-Day Low Today and What’s Next appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Ethereum has paused after its recent recovery, with the price action compressing beneath a key resistance area while still holding above higher lows. The current structure suggests that the market is approaching an inflection point where the next breakout or breakdown could determine the short-term direction.
Ethereum Price Analysis: The Daily Chart
On the daily timeframe, ETH remains below the long-term resistance zone between $2K and $2.15K, where the 100-day moving average continues to reinforce selling pressure. Although buyers managed to recover strongly from the June lows, the latest rejection near the 100-day MA highlights that the broader bearish structure has not yet been invalidated.
The recent pullback has brought the asset back into the $1.88K to $1.91K support zone, which now serves as the first line of defense for buyers. Holding above this area could allow another attempt toward the $2K to $2.15K resistance region, while losing it would expose the next demand zone around $1.75K to $1.8K. A deeper correction could eventually extend toward the stronger support around $1.56K to $1.65K.
ETH/USDT 4-Hour Chart
The 4-hour chart shows Ethereum consolidating inside a narrowing range between the white ascending trendline, acting as dynamic support, and the yellow descending trendline overhead. This compression reflects increasing indecision as buyers and sellers battle near the $1.88K to $1.91K supply zone.
As long as the price remains confined between these two trendlines, short-term volatility may stay limited. However, a breakdown below the white ascending trendline would invalidate the series of higher lows and likely trigger a decline toward the $1.75K to $1.8K demand zone. If that support also fails, the next downside target would be the broader demand area around $1.56K to $1.65K.
Conversely, a decisive breakout above the yellow trendline and the nearby supply zone would improve the short-term outlook and increase the probability of another move toward the major daily resistance overhead.
Sentiment Analysis
The Spot Average Order Size metric shows that large spot orders from whale-sized participants have become increasingly active during Ethereum’s recent recovery. Given that ETH is still trading relatively close to its yearly lows, this behavior is more consistent with accumulation than aggressive distribution.
Historically, increased participation from large spot buyers near depressed price levels has often reflected long-term positioning rather than short-term speculation. While this does not guarantee an immediate trend reversal, it suggests that larger market participants are gradually accumulating exposure as Ethereum trades well below its previous cycle highs.
The post ETH Price Analysis: What Does the $2K Rejection Mean for Ethereum’s Future? appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Michael Saylor has warned that changes to Bitcoin’s consensus rules pose a greater long-term threat than rival cryptocurrencies, governments, or external competition.
Summary
- Saylor called internal rule changes Bitcoin’s “gravest threat” after the asset gained broad market recognition.
- He argued that consensus rules protect property rights, scarcity, settlement, and limits on power.
- Saylor said proposals such as BIP-110 could weaken block-space scarcity and miners’ fee revenue.
- Strategy recently joined eight companies pledging $15 million toward Bitcoin security research.
Saylor warns against capturing Bitcoin consensus
Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor issued the warning in a series of X posts on Tuesday, describing Bitcoin’s consensus rules as its constitution. Those rules determine how ownership is recognized, how scarcity is maintained, how transactions settle, and what network participants can change.
“Bitcoin has won. Now it must survive victory,” Saylor wrote. “Its gravest threat is not an enemy at the gates, but corruption from within.”
He argued that changing the protocol to serve one group would infringe on the economic rights of miners, developers, investors, companies, custodians, and other users. Once one faction gains enough influence to rewrite the rules, he warned, competing groups may pursue changes through the same process.
That outcome could make protocol disputes permanent, according to Saylor. He said prolonged governance conflicts would drive away capital, slow development, weaken security, and leave Bitcoin with only a fraction of its potential.
Saylor expects Bitcoin could grow 100-fold and become part of the infrastructure supporting global capital markets. From that perspective, he argued that a poorly designed rule introduced today could restrict financial products, technologies, and economic activity that do not yet exist.
Why Saylor opposes BIP-110
Saylor’s latest comments extend his opposition to Bitcoin Improvement Proposal 110, a proposed temporary soft fork intended to reduce arbitrary data stored on the blockchain.
BIP-110 supporters argue that limiting some forms of data would ease storage and verification burdens for node operators. They also want Bitcoin to remain focused on monetary transactions rather than inscriptions, tokens, or file storage.
Saylor accepts that some on-chain data may have little value or could be linked to harmful activity. However, he argues that Bitcoin cannot reliably determine the purpose behind transaction data and should not use consensus rules to decide which valid, fee-paying transactions deserve block space.
“Bitcoin does not need guardians of purity,” Saylor wrote in his July 18 article. “It needs guardians of neutrality.”
His latest X thread widened that argument beyond BIP-110. Saylor also criticized proposals that add covenant functionality or increase block capacity, saying each approach creates different risks for Bitcoin’s base layer.
Bitcoin fee market and network security at stake
According to Saylor, restrictions on valid transactions could reduce competition for block space and weaken the fee market. Larger blocks, meanwhile, could dilute block-space scarcity while raising the bandwidth and hardware costs required to operate a node.
He also argued that covenants would make Bitcoin’s consensus rules more complex and introduce additional attack surfaces. These claims represent Saylor’s assessment of the proposals rather than an established consensus among Bitcoin developers.
Transaction fees will become increasingly important to miners as the block subsidy falls by half roughly every 210,000 blocks. Saylor warned that suppressing fee demand could reduce the income available to miners and weaken the financial incentives protecting the network.
His preferred approach is to keep the base layer simple, neutral, scarce, and secure. Developers can then build new functions through second-layer networks and applications, where adoption remains voluntary and failures have a more limited effect.
Strategy backs $15 million security effort
Saylor’s stance carries added relevance for US investors because Strategy has built its corporate model around holding Bitcoin and promoting enterprise adoption. He recently argued that companies are necessary for Bitcoin to develop into a global monetary network, placing corporate participation at the center of its next stage.
Strategy also joined Anchorage Digital, ARK Invest, BlackRock, Block, Blockstream, Coinbase, Fidelity Digital Assets, and Galaxy in forming the Bitcoin Security Consortium.
The nine firms pledged a combined $15 million over three years to support developers and researchers working on Bitcoin security, including preparations for potential quantum-computing threats. Members will direct their funding independently, while the consortium says it will neither control Bitcoin development nor take positions on individual protocol changes.
Saylor said upgrades should remain rare, conservative, and driven by necessity. His latest intervention places protocol restraint alongside corporate adoption and security funding as central parts of his long-term Bitcoin strategy.
Silver prices have regained strong upward momentum, climbing toward multi-year highs as investors return to safe-haven assets amid renewed geopolitical tensions. The precious metal recently surged more than 3% to around $58.92 per ounce, reversing an earlier pullback and moving back within striking distance of the key $60 psychological level.
The latest rally has been fueled by escalating tensions between the United States and Iran, while investors are also preparing for fresh US inflation data and comments from Federal Reserve officials. Together, these developments could determine whether silver extends its rally or pauses after one of its strongest advances in recent weeks.
Geopolitical Tensions Lift Silver Back Toward Multi-Year Highs
Silver rallied sharply after reports of renewed instability surrounding the US-Iran conflict increased demand for defensive assets. Spot prices climbed above $59 after briefly falling to around $58 earlier in the week, highlighting how quickly sentiment shifted back in favor of precious metals.
The rebound places silver comfortably above the important $58 to $56 support zone, an area that has become increasingly significant from a technical standpoint. Holding above this range suggests buyers remain active despite heightened volatility across financial markets.
Concerns surrounding the Strait of Hormuz and rising oil prices have also supported precious metals. As geopolitical uncertainty increases, investors often seek assets that can preserve value during periods of market stress, and silver has benefited alongside gold.
Although industrial demand continues to play an important role in silver’s long-term outlook, the latest gains have largely been driven by safe-haven buying. If geopolitical tensions continue to escalate, the metal could make another attempt to break above the recent highs near $61.
CoinCodex Silver Price Prediction
According to the latest CoinCodex Silver price prediction, the precious metal could transition from its current period of strength into a prolonged correction throughout late 2026 and 2027.
The forecast remains relatively constructive in July 2026, with prices projected to fluctuate between $45.84 and $57.67 and average levels near $51.75. While that would represent only a modest decline from current prices, the model suggests downside pressure gradually builds as the year progresses.
Momentum is expected to weaken considerably during the second half of 2026. Average prices are projected to fall into the mid-$40 range in August before declining toward roughly $35 in September. October and November continue that trend, with forecasts pointing to average prices around $32 as bearish momentum strengthens.
The outlook becomes even more cautious during 2027. CoinCodex projects average prices falling below $26 in January before slipping toward the low-$20 range during the spring months. By June and July 2027, the model forecasts average prices between approximately $15 and $17, making it the weakest period of the entire projection.
The post Silver Price Prediction: Can Safe-Haven Demand Push Silver Above $60? appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Cointelegraph is committed to providing independent, high-quality journalism across the crypto, blockchain, AI, and fintech industries.
All news, reviews, and analyses are produced with full journalistic independence and integrity. For more details on our standards and processes, please read our Editorial Policy.
Changpeng Zhao (CZ Binance) publicly backed a crypto license passporting system across ASEAN at the ASEAN Tech Summit Manila 2026 on July 28, arguing that firms already licensed in one member state should face only a streamlined approval process, not a full re-application, to operate across the rest of the bloc.
The proposal, if adopted, would materially reduce compliance overhead for crypto and stablecoin service providers targeting Southeast Asia’s fragmented regulatory landscape.
Speaking during the “One ASEAN, One Digital Economy” fireside chat alongside FinTech Alliance PH founding chair Lito Villanueva, CZ endorsed Villanueva’s idea of license portability across the region.
Regulators would retain the right to review applicants entering their jurisdiction, but the threshold would be fundamentally lower than starting from scratch in every market.
See you all tmr, in Manila
https://t.co/KOkXZmVoea
— CZ
BNB (@cz_binance) July 26, 2026
“I think that’s mostly a political problem,” Zhao said of cross-border regulatory coordination, adding that the underlying technology posed no meaningful obstacle.
He argued that allowing more licensed platforms to compete regionally would improve services and reduce costs for consumers, a straightforward pro-competition case that sidesteps the harder question of how to get nine politically distinct regulators to agree on mutual recognition standards.
Bitcoin News: Why Regulatory Fragmentation Is a Real Cost for ASEAN Crypto Firms
The problem Zhao is identifying is structural. Southeast Asia currently has no bloc-wide passport for crypto companies – each ASEAN member state runs its own digital asset licensing regime, with separate AML requirements, conduct rules, and capital standards.
A firm seeking a genuine regional presence must run parallel licensing processes across multiple jurisdictions simultaneously, which scales compliance costs in a way that disadvantages smaller, well-regulated operators relative to larger incumbents.
The regulatory framework Zhao described mirrors the EU’s MiCA model directly. Under the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation, a crypto-asset service provider authorized in one EU member state can passport its services across all 27 member states by notifying its home regulator of the countries and services involved, no fresh application required.
CZ referenced the MiCA architecture as the functional template for what ASEAN could build, and the comparison is structurally apt even if the political dynamics differ substantially between a treaty-based union and a looser regional grouping.
The ESMA implementation timeline for the Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation (MiCA).
The argument around Crypto regulation fragmentation being primarily political rather than technical carries weight here. Brad Garlinghouse has made a parallel case in the US context, framing regulatory incoherence as the primary drag on institutional crypto adoption, a problem of legislative will, not technical incapacity.
Discover: The Best Crypto to Diversify Your Portfolio
ASEAN Already Has Passporting Precedents in Adjacent Markets
The idea is not without regional precedent. The ASEAN Capital Markets Forum’s Collective Investment Schemes Framework, operationalized in Malaysia, Singapore, and Thailand in 2014, with the Philippines joining in 2021, allows a fund authorized in its home jurisdiction to be offered in participating host markets through a streamlined authorization process rather than full reregistration.
The ACMF Pass extends a similar fast-track model to investment advisers across participating jurisdictions.
These frameworks are narrower than those proposed by Zhao and Villanueva and remain subject to host-market requirements, but they establish that ASEAN regulators have already accepted the logic of mutual recognition in principle. Crypto-specific passporting would require agreement on supervision standards and consumer protection floors that don’t yet exist at the bloc level, but the institutional machinery for building them does.
For traders watching Binance’s regulatory trajectory, the Manila remarks fit a broader pattern of the exchange positioning itself in Asia as its primary licensing growth market. Ripple’s multi-jurisdictional expansion strategy illustrates the same operational reality CZ is addressing: operating at scale across Southeast Asia requires either accepting full licensing overhead in every market or pushing regulators toward a lighter mutual-recognition model.
Trade Ripple XRP on Bybit and Get a Chance to Win Our $1,000 USDT Airdrop
The post Inside CZ Binance Plan to Turn ASEAN Into Crypto Federation appeared first on Cryptonews.
JPMorgan Chase, Bank of America, Citigroup and Wells Fargo are developing a shared tokenized deposit network that could bring round-the-clock blockchain payments to the regulated US banking system.
Summary
- Four major US banks are jointly developing an interbank tokenized deposit network.
- The Clearing House is targeting a launch in the first half of 2027.
- Multinational companies will initially receive access to programmable treasury and cross-border payment tools.
- Banking groups are separately seeking tighter stablecoin reward rules under the CLARITY Act.
Four US banks move tokenized deposits onto one network
The Clearing House, a payments company jointly owned by major commercial banks, will operate the planned network. It aims to let participating institutions clear and settle tokenized deposits at any time while connecting blockchain-based activity with existing payment rails.
Tokenized deposits represent claims against money held at a commercial bank. Unlike stablecoins, the underlying funds remain within the regulated banking system and receive the same legal treatment as conventional deposits.
The network will initially serve multinational corporations. Its proposed uses include programmable treasury operations, real-time liquidity management, automated payments and cross-border transfers.
“This is a big move for the banks,” The Clearing House CEO David Watson said while discussing the project.
The initiative has support from more than a dozen other institutions, including BNY, HSBC, PNC, Santander, TD Bank, Truist and U.S. Bank. A blockchain provider has not yet been selected, according to earlier reporting.
Shared deposit tokens create a bank-led stablecoin rival
JPMorgan and Citigroup already operate separate blockchain payment services, but the new project would allow tokenized money to move between different banks.
JPMorgan’s Kinexys platform processes more than $7 billion in average daily volume and has handled over $40 trillion since its launch. Citi Token Services operates in the United States, United Kingdom, Singapore and Hong Kong, where it has transferred billions of dollars through Citigroup’s network.
A shared system could remove the limits of these closed networks. JPMorgan Payments co-head Max Neukirchen said a regulated market-infrastructure solution for clearing and settling tokenized deposits was needed to scale institutional on-chain payments.
Stablecoins already provide 24-hour transfers, programmable settlement and access across blockchain networks. About $263 billion in stablecoins are in circulation, giving crypto-native payment providers an established market that banks must now address.
Deposit tokens would offer similar settlement functions while keeping customers’ money on bank balance sheets. However, the banks must agree on common technical and operating standards despite competing for many of the same corporate clients.
CLARITY Act dispute raises the stakes for US banks
The network is taking shape as US banking groups pressure the Senate to tighten stablecoin provisions in the CLARITY Act.
The American Bankers Association, Independent Community Bankers of America and 76 state banking associations have asked lawmakers to prevent crypto platforms from offering incentives that function like interest on deposits.
Current language would prohibit interest-like returns on stablecoins held passively but permit rewards tied to payments and other qualifying activity. Banking groups argue that crypto companies could use these incentives to draw money away from banks, reducing the deposits available for consumer and business lending.
Goldman Sachs has split from the wider banking lobby over whether that disagreement should delay the bill. CEO David Solomon supports advancing the CLARITY Act despite calling it imperfect, arguing that establishing a federal market structure would provide greater certainty for digital asset development.
His position contrasts with JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon and other banking executives who have warned that the reward provisions could place regulated banks at a competitive disadvantage. Goldman’s support for advancing the bill does not necessarily mean it endorses every stablecoin provision.
Tokenized deposit network targets first-half 2027 launch
The Clearing House plans to make the system available to US financial institutions beyond its initial participants, potentially allowing smaller banks to access shared blockchain payment infrastructure.
Development will now depend on selecting the underlying technology, agreeing on operating standards and connecting the network with existing bank systems. The target remains the first half of 2027, although the participating institutions have not announced a specific launch date.
Multinational companies will provide the first test of whether regulated deposit tokens can match the speed and programmability of stablecoins without moving funds outside the banking sector.
Forget ‘Blade Runner,’ Netflix’s 2-Season Sci-Fi Masterpiece Changed the Genre Forever
Commonwealth Games 2026: Stephen ‘Mariah Cleggy’ channels Messi to swim to gold for Scotland
More than 200 wildfires across England and Wales in 12 days as ‘risk remains elevated across UK’
-
Fashion4 days agoWeekend Open Thread: Brooks Brothers
-
Business7 days agoNew Jersey voter registration controversy explained: How 6,600 noncitizens got on the rolls, and what happens next
-
Tech2 days agoIntel is reversing course and bringing hyper-threading back to its server chips
-
Sports2 days agoCommonwealth Games boxing: Jadumani Singh seals dominant 5-0 win over Pakistan’s Sumama Rehman to enter quarter-finals | Commonwealth Games News
-
Crypto World6 days agoEthics, other provisions in crypto Clarity Act to be further discussed
-
Politics1 day agoLuke Littler dismantles Gerwyn Price to retain title in Blackpool
-
Sports5 days ago2026 3M Open leaderboard: Scottie Scheffler finds putter in Round 1, sits three back
-
Fashion5 days ago16 Dresses for the High Summer Event
-
News Videos2 days agoBITCOIN JUST ENTERED THIS CRITICAL ZONE…
-
Politics14 hours agoThe Part of the Electric Transition Nobody Wants to Discuss
-
News Videos5 days agoThe Peugeot Family: How 200 Years of an “Old Money” Dynasty Died in A Boardroom
-
Entertainment4 days agoA New Post-Apocalyptic Gundam Anime Series Blasts Into SDCC
-
Politics2 days agoSpain sweeps the board at 2026 World Cup with individual awards
-
Crypto World3 days agoRipple bought a bank in pieces. The $4 billion audit
-
Crypto World3 days agoXRP Ledger adds $2.6B as RWA inflows rank second
-
Crypto World5 days agoUniswap (UNI) pushes deeper into tokenized RWAs with permissioned trading pools
-
Tech4 days agoAnthropic launches Claude Opus 5, a cheaper AI model for coding, agents and enterprise workflows
-
Entertainment4 hours ago‘Stargate’ Creator’s New Sci-Fi Series Returns for Season 3 Tomorrow
-
Entertainment3 days agoSara Gilson Killed By Husband After Viral “Pedophile” TikTok Video
-
Crypto World7 days agoSablier Labs Enters Maintenance Mode, Halts Development
You must be logged in to post a comment Login