The National Sheriffs’ Association (NSA) has reversed course on the Digital Asset Market Clarity (CLARITY) Act, moving from opposition to a neutral stance ahead of a Senate vote expected later this month. In a letter dated Thursday to Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer, the group said it would “step back” and allow the legislative process to continue in order to produce a clearer regulatory framework for the sector.

The change is notable because the NSA’s earlier criticism focused on provisions that, in its view, could weaken law enforcement’s ability to track cryptocurrency-related transactions—particularly around exemptions for crypto mixers from certain registration obligations. The group says that, after “significant work undertaken by Congress, the Administration, and stakeholders,” it now believes the most constructive path is to remain neutral while the bill advances.

Key takeaways

• The NSA has shifted its position on the CLARITY Act from opposition to “neutral,” citing broader legislative and regulatory progress.
• Its earlier objections centered on potential exemptions for crypto mixers from registration requirements, which the NSA said could hinder tracing and victim recovery.
• The House passed CLARITY in July 2025, but the measure has faced repeated hurdles in the Senate, including concerns raised by multiple stakeholders.
• Senate leadership has moved toward a procedural vote, with Thune filing a motion for a Sept. 15 cloture vote after senators return.
• Even if CLARITY stalls, top U.S. crypto regulators have signaled they may proceed with rulemaking through their agencies.

NSA shifts to neutral as CLARITY heads toward a Senate vote

In the Thursday letter, NSA president Troy Wellman and CEO and executive director Justin Smith said the association’s position is changing because of the “significant work undertaken” by lawmakers and stakeholders to address legal, regulatory, and enforcement issues tied to CLARITY. Rather than re-litigate its concerns at this stage, the NSA argued that the bill should be allowed to move forward through the legislative process to create “a clear, effective, and much needed regulatory framework.”

The NSA’s message suggests the group believes the bill’s drafting has evolved enough to warrant an altered posture, even though the underlying enforcement questions raised earlier have not necessarily disappeared from the broader policy debate.

What drove the NSA’s earlier opposition

Before changing course, the NSA had expressed opposition to parts of the CLARITY Act—specifically amendments it believed would exempt crypto mixers from many registration requirements. In its earlier correspondence to Senate Banking leadership (referenced in the Senate-record letter linked in the input), the NSA argued that such an exemption could “impair law enforcement’s ability to trace transactions and digital assets, and recover victims’ money.”

The association’s concern reflects a longstanding tension in crypto regulation: policymakers have tried to balance compliance and market integrity goals with concerns about privacy and the use of legitimate anonymity-enhancing tools. In the NSA’s view, easing regulatory obligations for mixers could raise practical enforcement challenges for tracing illicit flows.

In July, NSA leadership also underscored the stakes in a video statement—framing CLARITY as a law that, in their view at the time, protected the crypto industry more than the public.

CLARITY’s slow path through Congress

CLARITY was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in July 2025. After being sent to the Senate, the bill encountered multiple procedural and political obstacles. While the agriculture and banking committees passed versions of the measure in 2026, the bill has continued to face criticism and scrutiny from lawmakers and interest groups.

The input notes that ongoing concerns include elements related to stablecoin rewards, tokenized equities, and perceived conflicts of interest involving President Donald Trump and his family. Those issues illustrate that the debate over CLARITY is not only about enforcement and transparency, but also about how the legislation would structure participation and incentives across crypto and tokenized markets.

With the Senate set to return to session, procedural steps have been underway. Before the Senate broke in August, Thune filed a motion to hold a cloture vote on the bill on Sept. 15 once senators return from state work periods—an effort intended to move the measure forward despite potential delays.

Regulators signal they may act without CLARITY

While the legislative process remains in motion, the regulatory track is also developing. According to earlier coverage referenced in the input, Trump publicly supported CLARITY alongside leaders of the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), among others. In that context, SEC Chair Paul Atkins and CFTC Chair Michael Selig—both nominated by Trump—have signaled that their agencies would address crypto regulation even if Congress fails to pass the market structure bill.

That matters because it reframes what “market clarity” could mean in practice. If CLARITY advances, it could provide a statutory baseline for rules governing crypto market structure. If it stalls, regulators may attempt to fill gaps through agency action—though that approach can produce different outcomes from legislation, including differences in scope, timing, and how courts might ultimately interpret statutory authority.

For market participants, the NSA’s shift to neutrality adds another variable: it suggests that at least one major law-enforcement-adjacent stakeholder does not plan to oppose the bill at the final stretch. Traders, platforms, and compliance teams are therefore likely to watch the next procedural milestones—especially whether the Sept. 15 cloture vote holds—while paying close attention to whether the most contentious provisions, such as those affecting crypto mixers and related registration obligations, remain unchanged or are modified during further Senate consideration.

As the Senate prepares to vote, the key question for investors and builders is whether CLARITY will converge into a version that satisfies both market-structure goals and enforcement practicality. Readers should monitor not only the cloture timetable, but also any last-minute amendments that could alter the specific provisions the NSA and other stakeholders have argued over.

Trezor says the fallout from a data breach linked to its fulfillment processes is wider than it previously estimated. In an updated message posted to X on Friday, the hardware wallet provider reported that an additional 67,000 US customers may have had their full order details exposed after a shipping partner allegedly failed to delete data tied to specific orders.

Trezor emphasized that its own systems were not compromised. Instead, it pointed to third-party handling of order information, warning that the exposed details could still create risk for users—primarily through phishing and social engineering attacks aimed at stealing seed phrases.

Key takeaways

• Trezor reports that the affected group now includes an additional 67,000 US customers, expanding beyond the earlier estimate.
• The company says its hardware wallet systems were not breached, but order data may have remained accessible through a shipping provider.
• Exposed details include names, emails, shipping addresses, and order information—data that can help scammers craft convincing impersonation scams.
• Trezor warns the most serious risk is attackers using phishing to trick users into revealing seed phrases.

What Trezor says was exposed—and who is potentially at risk

According to the update posted by Trezor on X, the expanded estimate is connected to new information from its shipping provider, ShipMonk. Trezor said the breach may endanger users who placed orders between November 2019 and August 2021, a timeframe tied to those orders being potentially associated with accessible records.

In Trezor’s account, the exposed information would include full customer details such as a user’s name and email address, the shipping address used for the order, and order specifics. While that does not, by itself, grant access to a wallet, it can substantially lower the effort required for scammers to appear legitimate.

Trezor also indicated that these users had “full details exposed,” and it placed responsibility on ShipMonk for allegedly not deleting the order data from those records. The company said it had received written assurances from ShipMonk, according to the Friday update.

Why order-data breaches matter for hardware wallets

Hardware wallet security is designed to protect seed phrases and private keys from direct compromise. However, phishing is a different threat model: attackers do not need to break cryptography if they can trick users into voluntarily handing over the recovery information.

Trezor’s warning centers on that impersonation angle. With personal and order information in hand, attackers can send more targeted messages pretending to be Trezor support or other legitimate channels. If users follow the instructions in those messages, attackers could attempt to obtain seed phrases—the core secret that controls access to funds stored on a wallet.

Even if the breach did not expose wallet credentials directly, the disclosed details can make scams more believable, increasing the likelihood that some recipients will engage with fraudulent prompts.

How the estimate evolved over time

The updated number represents a clear change from earlier reporting. In August, Trezor initially estimated that about 14,000 users had their data exposed through ShipMonk, according to earlier coverage from Cointelegraph. Later, in January 2024, Trezor reported that roughly 66,000 users were at risk of phishing attacks if they contacted the company’s support team after December 2021.

By contrast, the new update on Friday frames the exposure in terms of a larger pool of US customers—those who ordered between November 2019 and August 2021—and it describes the data as fully detailed, rather than limited to a narrower set of circumstances.

This progression matters because it shifts the practical risk assessment for users. Instead of viewing the incident as affecting a small group—or as primarily tied to interactions with support—Trezor is now indicating that a much wider set of customers may have had sufficient personal and purchase context to support highly targeted phishing attempts.

Impersonation scams remain a major driver of crypto losses

Phishing and social engineering have repeatedly been shown to succeed without exploiting software vulnerabilities—largely because they rely on human trust and urgency. That dynamic has been reflected in security reporting for the broader crypto sector.

According to Hacken’s reporting cited in earlier Cointelegraph coverage, phishing attacks and social engineering accounted for $306 million of the $482 million lost in the first quarter of the year—making up the majority of industry losses during that period. The figure underscores that even when systems remain secure, compromised or leaked personal data can still fuel harmful scams.

Real-world examples also illustrate how convincing these approaches can be. Earlier coverage from Cointelegraph described a case in which a crypto investor lost nearly $1 million after signing a malicious token-approval phishing transaction on Ethereum.

What users should watch for next

With Trezor warning that attackers may use the exposed order details to impersonate the company, users in the affected period should remain alert for unsolicited messages that reference their purchase, ask for recovery information, or direct them to “support” pages. The immediate uncertainty is how many scam attempts will follow—but the underlying threat model (phishing toward seed phrases) is already clear from Trezor’s own assessment.

U.S. President Donald Trump has renewed his demand for lower interest rates and threatened to halt trade with deficit countries after employers added 162,000 jobs in August.

US jobs growth has exceeded forecasts

The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics reported Friday that nonfarm payrolls increased by 162,000 in August, while the unemployment rate remained at 4.1%. Economists polled by Reuters had expected the economy to add about 56,000 jobs.

August’s increase was also well above the average monthly gain of 31,000 recorded during the previous 12 months. The number of unemployed people changed little at 7 million, while the labor force participation rate edged up to 61.6%.

Revisions strengthened the report further. The BLS raised June’s increase from 20,000 to 31,000 and changed July’s estimate from a loss of 23,000 jobs to a gain of 21,000. Combined employment growth for the two months was therefore 55,000 higher than initially reported.

Food services and drinking establishments accounted for 59,000 new positions in August, compared with their 12-month monthly average of 12,000. Local government education added 42,000 jobs, and manufacturing employment rose by 16,000.

Information companies cut 23,000 positions, including losses among computing infrastructure providers, publishers, and broadcasters. Healthcare employment increased by 13,000, but the gain was below its monthly average of 32,000 during the past year.

Hourly earnings climbed 0.3% from July and 3.1% from a year earlier, according to the BLS. The average workweek increased by 0.1 hour to 34.4 hours.

The latest figures reversed part of the weakness seen in the previous employment release. In August, crypto.news reported that payrolls had fallen by an initially estimated 23,000 in July, prompting Bitcoin to rise above $65,000 as traders reduced their expectations for another rate increase.

Trump has tied rate demands to US trade

Following the August report, Trump used a Truth Social post to argue that the strength of the U.S. economy should allow the Federal Reserve to reduce borrowing costs.

“Lower the interest rates because the U.S.A. is a much stronger credit than it was just a short time ago!” Trump wrote.

The president also said the United States should have “the lowest rate of any country in the World, like ‘the old days.’” His demand conflicts with the reaction in interest-rate markets, where the stronger employment figures increased expectations that the Fed could raise rates at its Sept. 15–16 meeting.

Trump then connected monetary policy with his trade agenda, threatening action against countries that sell more goods and services to the United States than they buy from it.

“LOWER THE RATE OR I’LL STOP TRADING WITH COUNTRIES WITH WHICH WE HAVE A DEFICIT,” Trump wrote, according to Reuters.

In another part of the post, Trump argued that high interest rates placed the country at “a very unfair disadvantage.” He also called on Fed officials to “be patriots for a change” and claimed that cheaper borrowing would serve the United States better than tariffs.

The Federal Reserve sets interest rates independently through the Federal Open Market Committee. Its decisions are based on employment and price stability rather than direct instructions from the White House.

Trump’s trade threat did not identify the affected countries, a timetable, or the legal mechanism his administration might use. Reuters reported only that he would stop trading with countries against which the United States runs a deficit if the Fed did not lower rates.

A July tariff announcement covering 60 U.S. trading partners previously sent Bitcoin below $65,000 as Treasury yields rose and leveraged long positions absorbed most of the related crypto liquidations.

Bitcoin has fallen below $80,000

Bitcoin’s first reaction to Friday’s trading session was positive, with the asset reaching an intraday high of about $82,262. Selling accelerated after the payroll release, pulling BTC from around $81,600 to roughly $79,800 within minutes.

The reversal erased more than $2,000 from Bitcoin’s price and returned the asset below the $80,000 threshold. The move followed a sharp August rally during which BTC gained about 25%, and U.S. spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds received $3.52 billion in net inflows across 16 of 21 trading sessions.

CoinGlass figures cited in the original report showed that approximately $251 million in leveraged crypto positions were liquidated during the four hours surrounding the employment release. Long positions accounted for about $216 million, while short liquidations totaled $35.14 million.

Bret Kenwell, U.S. investment analyst at eToro, told Reuters that investors could interpret the employment figures through a “good news is bad news” lens, which could weigh on stocks and recently recovering crypto assets such as Bitcoin.

Kenwell said the Fed views the labor market as being close to full employment, leaving inflation as its main policy concern. Under that reading, strong hiring reduces the need to support the economy with cheaper credit.

A Sept. 3 Fed policy analysis found that Bitcoin entered the payroll release with rate expectations already posing a risk to its August gains. CME FedWatch had placed the probability of a quarter-point September increase at 66% earlier in the week, while oil prices above $90 and persistent inflation kept pressure on policymakers.

Higher U.S. rates can affect American crypto investors by raising returns on government debt and other interest-bearing assets. Kenwell attributed the connection to competition for capital, with investors able to earn higher yields without taking Bitcoin’s price risk.

Fed rate expectations have risen after payrolls

Fed funds futures priced a 61% probability of an interest-rate increase at the September meeting after the jobs data, up from 52% beforehand, Reuters reported. A separate Reuters market report placed the post-release probability at about 59%.

The stronger figure replaced the 54% probability given in the original report, which appears to have been captured at a different point in the session. Interest-rate probabilities can change throughout the day as traders adjust positions.

U.S. Treasury yields rose after the release, with the policy-sensitive two-year yield gaining five basis points to 4.38%. The 10-year yield moved one basis point higher to 4.776%, while the dollar index added 0.2% and gold fell 1.2%.

Citigroup responded by moving its forecast for the Fed’s next rate cut from late 2026 to June 2027. The bank now expects three quarter-point reductions in June, September, and December 2027 after dropping its earlier forecasts for cuts in October and December 2026 and January 2027.

Federal Reserve Governor Christopher Waller had said one day earlier that the next inflation report would carry considerable weight in his September decision. His comments had helped push the probability of an increase down to 38% on Polymarket, according to earlier Fed coverage.

The BLS will release the August producer price index on Sept. 10 and the consumer price index on Sept. 11. The Federal Open Market Committee will begin its two-day meeting on Sept. 15 and announce its interest-rate decision on Sept. 16.

DefiLlama and Forgd have introduced an AAA-to-CCC rating system covering 128 of 149 listed tokens, with Uniswap currently holding the dashboard’s only AAA grade at a composite score of 60.80.

DefiLlama’s live Universal Token Rating dashboard places Uniswap first with disclosure and performance scores of 7.87 and 7.72, respectively. Meteora follows with an AA grade and a composite score of 58.48, while Curve DAO ranks third at 53.32.

Developed with token advisory platform Forgd, the system grades assets by combining what a project discloses with what trading data shows. Its disclosure assessment covers areas such as tokenomics, insider wallets and commercial arrangements, while the performance side examines liquidity, spreads, venue coverage and market-maker conduct.

DefiLlama Head of Research Ryan Celaj told crypto.news that both components are required because averaging them could allow strength in one area to conceal serious problems in another.

“We’re multiplying a project’s disclosure and performance scores deliberately, because they are both necessary conditions for credibility. And ‘necessary’ is the key word. It’s not that performance and disclosures both factor in. They’re required.”

Under the formula, a project with a disclosure score of 10 and a performance score of 2 receives a composite score of 20. Celaj said an average would give the same project a much less critical score despite its weak market performance.

DefiLlama token grades require strength on both axes

The two scores range from zero to 10 and are multiplied to produce a result out of 100. AAA begins at 60, meaning a token cannot reach the top category if either component falls below six, even with a perfect score on the other axis.

AA starts at 40, with narrower bands separating A, BBB, BB, and B as weaknesses increase. Celaj said the thresholds make the highest grades difficult to obtain while creating distinctions among assets further down the table.

Although the letters resemble grades used in conventional finance, Celaj said they do not estimate default probabilities and should not be treated as equivalents to ratings issued by a traditional credit-rating agency. The format was selected because institutional traders already understand the AAA-to-CCC scale.

The approach also links stated policies to observable results. A project may publish detailed market-making terms or token-distribution plans, but the performance score tests whether liquidity, trading activity and wallet behavior match those claims.

Uniswap founder Hayden Adams drew attention to the results after UNI received the only AAA grade. Referring to the ranking in an Aug. 27 X post, Adams called it “the result of a neutral, unbiased ratings system” and referred to past criticism of Uniswap as “crypto Twitter psyops and fud.”

Pineapple Financial has onboarded more than $1 billion in residential mortgage records to Injective, marking a significant step in its plan to migrate a long-running mortgage portfolio onto a public blockchain network. Injective said Friday that Pineapple aims to bring more than 29,000 funded mortgages—worth over $10 billion—onto the platform over time.

Unlike many tokenization models that package loans into new securities, Pineapple’s approach centers on moving existing loan documentation into onchain “records.” Each mortgage is represented by an onchain entry linked to the underlying loan file, rather than being repackaged as a separate mortgage security.

Key takeaways

• Pineapple has migrated over $1 billion in residential mortgage records to Injective, per Injective.
• Injective says Pineapple intends to move 29,000+ funded mortgages worth $10 billion+ in total.
• Onchain mortgage records are built around 500+ loan-related data points, designed to support verification, audit trails, and risk analysis.
• PAPL0, which tracks the mortgage records on Injective, shows an asset market cap of about $1.1 billion (Token Terminal data).
• The mortgage record tokens are described as representing records, not direct ownership of the underlying loans.

How Pineapple is putting mortgages onchain

Injective framed Pineapple’s migration as part of a broader effort to move a historical loan portfolio onchain. The company said each migrated mortgage corresponds to an onchain record tied to the underlying loan file, with the structure intended to preserve the relationship between onchain data and the original loan documentation.

Injective also highlighted the data depth of the system: the records reportedly include more than 500 data points spanning loan-level information. In practical terms, that level of detail can be useful for building auditability and enabling risk analysis directly around the referenced mortgage file—capabilities that would be harder to achieve if only minimal metadata were stored onchain.

As of the latest update, Pineapple’s dashboard shows the program includes 2,079 mortgage records, compared with 1,259 when the migration initiative began in December 2025. That jump underscores that the project is not limited to a pilot dataset, but is expanding into larger portions of the mortgage book.

PAPL0 growth and what the token actually represents

On Injective, Pineapple’s onchain mortgage record tracking is associated with PAPL0. According to Token Terminal data, PAPL0 has an asset market cap of roughly $1.1 billion, up 48.2% over the past nine months.

Token Terminal’s project page describes PAPL0 as a vehicle tied to mortgage records on Injective. Importantly, the token is presented as representing the mortgage records themselves—not ownership of the underlying loans. That distinction matters for investors and counterparties evaluating what economic exposure they’re actually getting: record ownership and tokenized loan exposure are not always the same thing in real-world asset (RWA) designs.

Injective and Pineapple: beyond the migration

The mortgage records migration also sits within a broader relationship between Pineapple and Injective. Injective said the partnership includes a separate $100 million Injective (INJ) digital asset treasury. Within that arrangement, Pineapple reportedly stakes INJ from the treasury, and Kraken serves as a primary validator for the holdings.

That setup highlights a common challenge in onchain finance: moving RWAs is not only about tokenizing assets, but also about operational infrastructure such as staking, validation, and the ongoing management of blockchain-based holdings that support the tokenized system.

Real estate tokenization is widening—but remains niche

Mortgage record tokenization is part of a broader push to bring traditionally illiquid real estate and related investment interests onto blockchain networks. The central promise remains similar across projects: tokenization can make it easier to divide interests, transfer them, and provide more transparent access to certain asset-related information.

Recent coverage across the sector points to momentum in other formats as well. In June, Apex Group joined Goldman Sachs, Archax, and LRC Group on a tokenized real estate fund where shares are issued as digital tokens through Goldman Sachs’ Digital Asset Platform. In Dubai, tokenization efforts have also expanded: the Dubai Land Department launched a second phase of a pilot after about $5 million in property had been tokenized, with transactions recorded on the XRP Ledger, according to earlier reporting.

Still, the scale of tokenized real estate remains small compared with the overall RWA market. RWA.xyz data referenced in the article estimates tokenized real estate at about $226.5 million in distributed value, up 11.7% over the past 30 days, versus roughly $38.8 billion across tokenized RWAs tracked by RWA.xyz.

For market participants, this imbalance suggests a key tension in the RWA narrative: while real estate continues to attract serious experimentation, adoption and capital allocation across the broader tokenized assets space are happening faster elsewhere.

Going forward, the key question for readers is whether Pineapple’s approach—using rich loan-level records tied to underlying files, rather than repackaging mortgages into new securities—can sustain scaling beyond early migration milestones. The pace of record onboarding (2,079 currently, versus 1,259 at launch in December 2025) will likely be a close signal to watch as the project progresses toward its stated goal of 29,000+ funded mortgages.

Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor has defended Americans’ ability to advocate for Bitcoin without a license, while separating public recommendations from fraud and market manipulation.

According to a Sept. 4 X post, Saylor argued that discussing Bitcoin, advocating for its adoption, and recommending ownership are permitted activities in the United States.

Michael Saylor separates Bitcoin advocacy from fraud

“In America, you don’t need a license to discuss Bitcoin, advocate for it, or publicly recommend owning it,” Saylor wrote.

The Strategy chairman then drew a line between promoting the asset and engaging in illegal trading practices.

“Bitcoin is a commodity, not a security. Fraud and manipulation are illegal,” he added.

Saylor did not point to a specific enforcement case, regulatory proposal, or dispute in his post. Instead, his statement presented public Bitcoin advocacy as separate from conduct that can trigger action under existing fraud and market-manipulation laws.

His description of Bitcoin as a commodity also follows the position long taken by the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. The agency has asserted authority over fraud and manipulation involving Bitcoin in interstate commerce, while its direct regulatory powers are more extensive in derivatives markets.

The Securities and Exchange Commission has separately allowed spot Bitcoin exchange-traded products to trade on U.S. exchanges. Approval of those products gave American investors access to Bitcoin exposure through regulated brokerage accounts, although the SEC has said approving an exchange-traded product does not amount to endorsing its underlying asset.

Saylor’s statement concerns public discussion rather than the legal duties that may apply when a person sells securities, manages money, provides personalized investment advice or makes misleading claims. His post did not claim that free speech protections exempt fraud, manipulation, or other prohibited conduct.

Public promotion can also carry disclosure duties in certain circumstances. The SEC has previously brought cases against celebrities who promoted tokens treated as securities without revealing compensation, but Saylor’s post dealt specifically with Bitcoin, which he described as a commodity.

Bitcoin classification remains part of the CLARITY Act debate

In Washington, lawmakers are still considering legislation that would define how the SEC and CFTC divide responsibility for digital assets.

The Senate is scheduled to hold an upcoming procedural vote on the CLARITY Act at 2:15 p.m. ET on Sept. 15. The motion to proceed requires support from at least 60 senators and would open the bill to debate and amendments rather than send it directly to the president.

Republicans hold 53 Senate seats, leaving the measure dependent on Democratic support even if every Republican votes to advance it. Internal Republican objections could increase the number of opposition votes needed, according to recent reporting on the negotiations.

Under the proposed framework, digital commodities would generally fall under the CFTC’s spot-market authority, while assets offered as investment contracts would remain within the SEC’s securities jurisdiction. Registered digital commodity exchanges, brokers, and dealers would also face federal operating and compliance requirements.

Bitcoin is the clearest asset expected to fall within the commodity category. Saylor’s classification claim therefore aligns with a central part of the policy framework, although his brief post did not mention the CLARITY Act or call for any specific language in the bill.

Lawmakers continue to negotiate ethics provisions, stablecoin rewards, and protections for developers who do not control customer assets. Supporters say a federal statute would replace regulatory uncertainty with written divisions of authority, while critics have raised questions about consumer protection, illicit finance and the reach of exemptions for decentralized software.

Sheriffs withdraw opposition before the Senate vote

The National Sheriffs’ Association has changed its position on the CLARITY Act from opposition to neutral, removing one source of resistance less than two weeks before the scheduled vote.

As crypto.news reported on Sept. 4, NSA President Sheriff Troy Wellman and Executive Director Justin Smith disclosed the new position in a Sept. 3 letter to Senate Majority Leader John Thune and Minority Leader Chuck Schumer.

The organization previously objected to protections for noncontrolling developers and software providers, arguing that parts of the legislation could hinder investigations into illicit activity conducted through decentralized finance systems. Its neutral position allows Congress to continue working on the bill without formal opposition from the group, but it does not amount to an endorsement.

Senator Cynthia Lummis welcomed the decision in a post on X and urged the Senate to advance the measure. Lummis has argued that the legislation would give law enforcement more resources to pursue crypto-related crime while imposing anti-money laundering duties on covered intermediaries.

Section 10604 of the Senate text would prevent a developer from being treated as a money-transmitting business solely for creating certain software or infrastructure, provided that the developer lacks the legal right and unilateral ability to control users’ transactions.

Supporters of the provision say existing laws against money laundering, wire fraud, sanctions violations, and terrorist financing would remain in effect. Several law-enforcement organizations have supported the bill or adopted neutral positions, while other groups have sought narrower protections and more authority for investigators.

Even if the Senate clears the Sept. 15 motion, senators would still have to debate amendments and vote on final passage. Any changes to the House-approved text would also require action by the House before the legislation could reach the president.

Strategy resumes Bitcoin purchases with 4,603 BTC

Alongside Saylor’s public advocacy, Strategy has returned to the Bitcoin market after going roughly 10 weeks without a net purchase.

An Aug. 31 filing with the SEC showed that Strategy bought 4,603 BTC between Aug. 24 and Aug. 30. The company spent about $369.7 million at an average price of $80,318 per Bitcoin, including fees and expenses.

The acquisition raised Strategy’s holdings from 840,447 BTC to 845,050 BTC. According to the filing, the company paid an aggregate $63.73 billion for the position, producing an average purchase price of $75,412 per coin.

Strategy financed the latest acquisition through sales of its MSTR common stock, which generated approximately $602.8 million in net proceeds during the reporting period. The company also spent $151.8 million repurchasing STRC preferred shares and increased its unrestricted U.S. dollar reserve by $30 million.

Chief Executive Phong Le later said the company evaluates Bitcoin transactions according to its cost of capital rather than the cryptocurrency’s price alone. Explaining Strategy’s capital-cost approach, Le said financing conditions can make a purchase at $80,000 appropriate even after sales closer to $60,000.

MSTR traded at $142.80 late on Sept. 4, down about 1.5% from its previous close. The U.S.-listed stock moved between an intraday low of $135.41 and a high of $144.39, with approximately 26.3 million shares changing hands.

Robinhood has rejected AMC Entertainment’s demand to halt an AMC-linked token, turning a dispute over one of its 189 stock products into a test of how US rules may treat third-party tokenized equities.

Robinhood chief legal officer Dan Gallagher refused AMC CEO Adam Aron’s demand to stop trading tokens tied to the company’s stock, writing on X that the brokerage would not “DECIST” before telling AMC to “send your lawyers.”

Robinhood CEO Vlad Tenev backed Gallagher’s response minutes later, saying the company stood behind its Stock Tokens. The statements escalated a public disagreement that began when Aron said AMC had neither approved nor participated in the product.

Robinhood-AMC clash moves from objection to legal threat

Aron initially accused Robinhood of marketing a security connected to AMC without the company’s authorization. As crypto.news reported earlier, the theater executive described the product as “contemptible” and said outside securities counsel would examine the matter.

After Tenev asked him to explain his concerns, Aron argued that Robinhood had created a synthetic market through a unit based in Jersey, outside the United States. According to the AMC chief, stock-token buyers do not receive the voting, ownership, or other rights held by ordinary shareholders.

Aron also claimed that a separate market-tracking AMC could interfere with the company’s control over its capital-raising activity. He called on Robinhood to “cease and desist” voluntarily and said AMC would consider asking the Securities and Exchange Commission to review the arrangement.

No lawsuit or SEC enforcement action against Robinhood’s AMC product had been announced at the time of publication. Aron’s statements therefore remain allegations rather than findings that Robinhood violated US securities laws.

Gallagher, who served as an SEC commissioner between 2011 and 2015, rejected the demand without giving a detailed legal response. Tenev later reposted Gallagher’s message and reiterated Robinhood’s support for the product.

Robinhood stock tokens provide exposure without AMC ownership

Robinhood’s documents describe the assets as tokenized debt securities issued by Robinhood Assets (Jersey) Limited, rather than shares issued by the companies they track.

According to the company’s Stock Token documentation, each ERC-20 token corresponds to a particular stock or exchange-traded fund and uses a Chainlink data feed to publish its reference price onchain. Robinhood says the tokens are backed one-for-one by underlying shares held with a licensed custodian.

Ownership of a token, however, does not give its holder legal or beneficial rights against AMC or any other referenced company. Token holders cannot vote as AMC shareholders, and their claims depend on their contractual relationship with the Jersey issuer.

Robinhood says investors can sell the tokens in secondary markets or redeem them with the issuer after completing identity and anti-money laundering checks. If the issuer becomes insolvent, the company says an independent security agent would sell the underlying shares and arrange cash payments to eligible token holders.

Corporate actions also follow a different process from conventional share ownership. Robinhood manages dividends and stock splits through an onchain multiplier that adjusts the number of shares represented by each token without changing the holder’s raw token balance.

The company’s July 2026 quarterly filing states that approvals obtained in Jersey do not amount to regulatory endorsement or prudential supervision. Liechtenstein’s Financial Market Authority approved the base prospectus for completeness, consistency and ease of understanding under the EU Prospectus Regulation, but Robinhood’s filing says the decision should not be treated as an endorsement of the issuer or its products.

Stock Tokens have not been registered under the US Securities Act and cannot be offered, sold or delivered in the United States or to US persons. Restrictions also apply in Canada, the United Kingdom, and Switzerland, according to Robinhood.

For American investors, the restrictions mean an AMC token cannot currently serve as an alternative to buying AMC shares through a US broker. Robinhood nevertheless acknowledged in its filing that the product could expose the company to regulatory, litigation, contractual, operational, and reputational risks.

RedStone sees consent and registration as the dividing line

Marcin Kaźmierczak, co-founder of blockchain oracle provider RedStone, told crypto.news that AMC’s objection concerns how Robinhood structured and issued the asset, rather than the use of blockchain technology.

“This dispute is not a tokenization problem. Robinhood wrapped a public company’s shares into an offshore, unregistered derivative without notifying the company, so this reaction was predictable. It’s a consent and registration issue.”

Kaźmierczak said the products most likely to survive regulatory review would involve the referenced company and comply with securities requirements from launch. In his view, an issuer-backed instrument has a stronger path than a synthetic product designed to operate outside US securities registration.

“Expect this fight to speed up the push for an actual U.S. framework rather than slow tokenization down.”

His comments describe an expected policy effect and do not establish that public companies presently have a legal right to approve every third-party derivative that references their shares. The legality of Robinhood’s structure would depend on the applicable securities, derivatives, disclosure, and marketing rules, as well as the jurisdictions in which the product is offered.

RWA.xyz data placed the value of distributed tokenized stocks at approximately $2.91 billion on Sept. 4, up 17.5% over 30 days. The tracker listed 5,245 products and put Robinhood sixth among tracked platforms, with 189 assets carrying a combined value of about $103.2 million.

US rules distinguish ownership from synthetic exposure

The SEC’s Divisions of Corporation Finance, Investment Management, and Trading and Markets drew a formal distinction between issuer-sponsored and third-party tokenized securities in a January staff statement.

Under an issuer-sponsored model, a company or its agent can record the security directly on a blockchain or use a token to initiate changes in an offchain shareholder register. A third party can also tokenize another company’s security, but the SEC staff said the resulting product may not provide an ownership interest or contractual claim against the original issuer.

Third-party structures can expose buyers to risks connected to the token provider, including its possible bankruptcy, which a direct holder of the underlying stock may not face, according to the SEC statement.

In February, the SEC’s Investor Advisory Committee recommended mandatory disclosures that explain token holders’ ownership rights. The committee also called for SEC, state, or Financial Industry Regulatory Authority oversight of intermediaries and trading protections designed to give investors the best available execution terms.

Two securities transfer groups later pressed for issuer-backed products while asking the SEC to limit relief for unaffiliated tokens. Continental Stock Transfer & Trust and the Securities Transfer Association argued that third-party products could confuse investors about custody, dividends, voting, insolvency claims, and the identity of the legal shareholder.

The SEC has separately been preparing a limited route for tokenized stocks that could allow selected platforms to test continuous trading under defined conditions. No final eligibility rules or implementation date have been announced, and existing federal securities requirements remain in force.

Nasdaq received SEC approval for a pilot in March covering eligible Russell 1000 securities and major index-linked ETFs. Under the approved structure, participants can select traditional or tokenized settlement while receiving the same rights and pricing attached to the underlying securities.

The US jobs report landed hotter than many economists expected in August, and the immediate ripple was felt across risk assets—including Bitcoin. According to figures released on Friday, the US economy added 162,000 nonfarm payroll jobs, roughly three times the consensus estimate of about 56,000. Bitcoin initially slid from around $81,300 to local lows near $78,600 before recovering to about $79,500 by the time of writing.

The stronger labor market also injected fresh volatility into expectations for the next Federal Open Market Committee (FOMC) decision on Sept. 15–16. With the Fed’s path still being debated, traders appeared to reprice the odds of a pause versus a rate hike after the payroll release, even as parts of the political debate around interest rates intensified.

Key takeaways

• US nonfarm payrolls rose to 162,000 in August—well above the ~56,000 economist consensus.
• Bitcoin reacted with a selloff from $81,300 to $78,600, then rebounded to roughly $79,500.
• Polymarket’s implied probabilities for the Sept. 16 FOMC rate decision swung back toward a 50/50 split after the data.
• A Blake2b-based Bitcoin fork (continuation of the BIP-110 chain) recorded early spot activity, with coins trading on Neoxa around $350 versus USDC.

Hotter payrolls shift FOMC expectations again

Labor market strength tends to matter for central-bank policy because it can influence whether inflation pressures persist and how quickly—if at all—the Fed can comfortably ease rates. This latest set of numbers landed decisively above forecast, and traders reacted in real time.

Earlier in the week, sentiment around the upcoming FOMC meeting had already been unstable. In particular, Fed Governor Christopher Waller signaled on Thursday that he would favor a pause pending upcoming inflation data. That comment helped move market-implied odds: Polymarket reportedly shifted probabilities to 60% for a pause and 40% for a 25 basis-point rate hike.

Friday’s labor data changed the picture. After the payrolls beat expectations, implied probabilities returned to a roughly even split, with Polymarket showing a 50/50 division between the pause and a 25 basis-point hike.

Beyond the markets, political pressure on the Fed’s policy direction also became part of the narrative. US President Donald Trump used Truth Social to demand further rate cuts, arguing that high interest rates put the US at a disadvantage and saying he would not allow it. The post also framed the debate as a change in stance from previous leadership—after Trump had criticized former Chair Jerome Powell for not cutting rates, though he waited until Friday to make a similar demand aimed at the then-newer Fed leadership context.

Why Bitcoin sold off after a jobs beat

Bitcoin’s drop immediately after the payroll release followed a pattern investors have seen in many rate-sensitive environments: stronger economic prints can increase expectations that borrowing costs will remain higher for longer. That can translate into tighter financial conditions and reduced appetite for high-volatility assets.

In this case, the chart response was clear. Bitcoin moved off roughly $81,300 to local lows around $78,600 following the data, then partially recovered to about $79,500. While that rebound suggests traders were not fully committed to a sustained risk-off trajectory, the initial selloff highlights how quickly macro data can overpower other narratives when the policy path feels uncertain.

With the next FOMC meeting approaching, this jobs report adds another data point traders can use to calibrate their view of the Fed’s reaction function. What remains uncertain is not only the direction of policy, but also whether committee members ultimately align behind a single approach—especially as forward guidance has been viewed by many traders as less anchored than it was during prior eras of clearer signaling.

Blake2b Bitcoin fork finds its first thin liquidity

Separate from the macro-driven market moves, a technical development inside the “Bitcoin fork” ecosystem drew attention. After the BIP-110 soft fork activated on Aug. 7, the network temporarily split between a chain enforcing BIP-110 rules and another chain continuing under the previous ruleset.

Supporters of BIP-110 argued the branch struggled because miners did not allocate enough computational power to continue extending it. In response, they have pointed to this outcome as evidence—at least in their view—of how concentrated influence can be within the mining layer. Their criticism centers on the fact that only a small number of mining pools control the majority of Bitcoin’s hashrate, meaning the same entities can strongly affect which chain progresses and which transactions make it into blocks.

From there, a subset of BIP-110 supporters pursued a different approach. Led by LukeDashjr, they continued the BIP-110 chain while changing the proof-of-work algorithm to Blake2b, aiming—according to the proponents’ rationale—to make it easier for a different set of miners to participate using DATUM gateway technology. The relevant hard fork was initiated on Aug. 30.

A key practical implication is that holders of SHA-256 Bitcoin balances were mapped 1:1 into the Blake2b version: every address holding SHA-256 Bitcoin before Aug. 7 (and possibly after) is reported to hold an equivalent amount on the Blake2b chain.

At the moment, liquidity is still limited. The only exchange listing Blake2b Bitcoin is Neoxa. Even so, early trading is visible: Blake2b coins are trading at about $350 against USDC, with an approximately 1.1% spread, based on Neoxa’s order book for the pair BTCB2/USDC.

What to watch next: macro volatility and fork liquidity

Going forward, the immediate driver of Bitcoin’s near-term mood is likely to remain macro—especially around the Fed meeting on Sept. 15–16, where fresh labor and inflation data can still reweight the market’s odds. At the same time, the Blake2b fork story is a separate but related reminder that “Bitcoin ecosystem” developments are increasingly moving in parallel paths—where token availability on exchanges and liquidity depth may determine whether these narratives can move beyond niche trading.