Cameron Winklevoss has defended Zcash after the privacy coin plunged as much as 45% and Cypherpunk Technologies shares dropped 37% following disclosure of a critical bug that could have allowed unlimited counterfeit ZEC to be created.

According to a June 5 X post, Cameron Winklevoss defended Zcash as investors reacted to the disclosure of a critical vulnerability in the network’s Orchard shielded pool. While acknowledging that bugs can emerge in any blockchain system, he argued that the focus should be on how quickly researchers identify and address them.

“When it comes to any L1, there will be bugs. What’s important is that there are world class researchers focused on hardening the network and staying ahead of the bad guys.”

His remarks arrived as pressure spread across companies tied to the Zcash ecosystem.

Shares of Cypherpunk Technologies, a publicly traded company focused on accumulating Zcash, fell to their lowest level since March. Yahoo Finance data showed the stock dropped 37% to $0.59 after touching an intraday low of $0.53. At the same time, shares of Gemini-linked GEMI declined 4.4% to $4.41 as technology stocks weakened across U.S. markets.

Shielded Labs says exploit was possible before emergency fix

Details released by Shielded Labs showed that security researcher Taylor Hornby discovered the vulnerability on May 29 during an AI-assisted audit. According to the organization, the flaw remained undetected for roughly four years inside the Orchard shielded pool.

Shielded Labs stated that Hornby successfully used the exploit in a local testing environment to create unlimited counterfeit ZEC without detection. The organization added that the same method could have worked on the Zcash mainnet before the issue was patched.

An emergency response led by the Zcash Open Development Lab and other ecosystem contributors resulted in a network upgrade completed by June 2. The fix temporarily paused Orchard activity before restoring it with corrected code.

Despite the repair, Shielded Labs said cryptographic tools alone cannot determine whether the exploit was used before the patch because Orchard transactions are designed to preserve privacy.

While the organization described prior exploitation as unlikely, it emphasized that users should not rely solely on that assessment.

The Zcash Foundation later released Zebra 5.0.0 through the NU6.2 hard fork, re-enabling Orchard with the corrected circuit. According to the foundation, no evidence of unauthorized value creation had been identified.

Market participants cut exposure as uncertainty grows

Selling intensified across Zcash-related assets following the disclosure. According to data from crypto.news, Zcash (ZEC) plunged more than 45% in 24 hours, hitting an intraday low of $264.80 on June 5. The privacy coin has since pared some of those losses and was changing hands at around $361 at press time.

Among those reducing exposure was BitMEX co-founder Arthur Hayes. In a post on X, Hayes said he sold his entire ZEC position because the incident undermined his investment thesis around privacy-focused assets.

Hayes wrote that exploitation appeared “extremely unlikely” but argued that the inability to conclusively rule it out created a problem for a privacy-focused cryptocurrency. 

“The privacy from AI, govt, big tech narrative demands perfection not improbability. I read about the exploit yday, and didn’t appreciate how it violated my narrative mental map. The 30% dump, made me rethink, and I had to take profit on the entire position.”

Meanwhile, Cypherpunk pushed back against concerns that counterfeit coins had entered circulation. In a statement posted on X, the company said there was “zero evidence” that the vulnerability had been exploited. It also argued that an attacker would have had little incentive to hold counterfeit ZEC through a major bull market instead of selling the coins earlier.

Hyperliquid has been flagged by the UK Financial Conduct Authority, bringing regulatory scrutiny to one of the largest crypto perpetual futures venues.

According to a notice published by the UK Financial Conduct Authority on May 21, Hyperliquid, Hyper Foundation, the protocol’s application, and related social media channels may be offering or promoting financial services and products in the United Kingdom without authorization.

The regulator stated that consumers should avoid dealing with the platform and warned that firms operating without approval may not provide the protections available through regulated financial services.

The FCA’s warning arrived as cryptocurrency perpetual futures, commonly known as perps, attract increasing attention from regulators, exchanges, and trading firms.

Unlike traditional futures contracts, perpetual futures have no expiration date and rely on recurring funding payments to keep prices aligned with spot markets.

At the same time, major operators of regulated exchanges have begun discussing whether similar products could gain a larger foothold in traditional financial markets.

Traditional exchanges are studying perpetual futures

Speaking at Piper Sandler’s Global Exchange & Fintech conference on June 4, CME Group Chief Executive Terry Duffy criticized the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s decision to allow regulated crypto perpetual futures in the U.S.

Duffy argued that the highly leveraged products introduce risks that many market participants may underestimate. He said perpetual futures can allow traders to maintain positions indefinitely while using leverage that may reach 50 times the deposited capital.

According to Duffy, automatic liquidation mechanisms and funding-rate costs could expose retail investors to significant losses if they do not fully understand how the products function.

Describing the market as increasingly driven by speculation, Duffy questioned whether the new contracts serve the long-term interests of investors.

While CME’s chief executive voiced concerns, Intercontinental Exchange Chief Executive Jeffrey Sprecher took a different approach. During remarks made last week, Sprecher said the parent company of the New York Stock Exchange was studying Hyperliquid’s model and discussing with regulators why traditional venues could not offer comparable products.

Those comments emerged as regulated crypto perpetual futures began entering the U.S. market. On May 29, the CFTC approved the first regulated crypto perpetual futures products for U.S. participants, opening a market that had previously been dominated by offshore platforms.

U.S. firms move into a market long led by offshore venues

Following the regulatory approval, prediction market operator Kalshi launched Bitcoin perpetual futures and introduced Ethereum perpetual futures on June 4.

According to regulatory filings, another 11 cryptocurrency perpetual futures contracts, including products tied to Solana and Dogecoin, remain under review.

Elsewhere in the sector, Coinbase Financial Markets received regulatory guidance allowing eligible institutional clients in the United States to access perpetual futures and options listed on Deribit, the derivatives exchange acquired by Coinbase in 2025.

Kraken has also announced plans to offer regulated Bitcoin perpetual futures through Bitnomial Exchange, a regulated platform acquired by parent company Payward earlier this year.

Against that backdrop, Hyperliquid remains one of the largest decentralized venues for perpetual futures trading.

The platform’s scale has made it increasingly difficult for regulators and traditional exchanges to ignore. By May 20, Hyperliquid had generated $255 million in revenue for the year, according to reported figures, while the HYPE token had gained 101% over the same period.

Triple-A, a licensed global payments firm, has begun a European rollout of Multicurrency Accounts that link local euro collections to stablecoin rails and global payout options. The product gives businesses a named EUR IBAN without needing an EU legal entity and consolidates collection, conversion and payout into a single platform that supports payouts to more than 70 countries.

What the product does

The Multicurrency Accounts offer customers a named euro International Bank Account Number, enabling firms to receive SEPA and SEPA Instant transfers as if they had a local euro account. From there, funds can be routed to a traditional bank account, converted and sent into a stablecoin, or distributed as local-currency payouts across Triple-A’s supported markets.

Key capabilities include:

• Collection of euro payments via SEPA rails without establishing an EU entity or separate local bank account.
• Integrated conversion and settlement into stablecoins alongside traditional fiat payouts.
• Global payout coverage exceeding 70 jurisdictions, intended to simplify reconciliation and lower transaction predictability.

Why this matters to businesses

For companies that sell into Europe or run platforms with EU-based users, collecting euros typically requires either opening a local subsidiary and bank account or relying on intermediary providers, which can add cost, time and reconciliation complexity. Triple-A’s offering aims to remove that onboarding hurdle by providing named euro accounts without a local entity, while keeping collection and payout flows connected in the same infrastructure.

That unified approach is significant because it collapses what are often separate steps in cross-border workflows: collection, conversion and payout. By linking SEPA collection directly to stablecoin rails and local-currency payouts, payouts can be executed faster and with fewer handoffs. For B2B sellers, marketplaces, and platforms that manage many payees across multiple jurisdictions, this reduces operational friction and can improve cash flow timing.

Regulatory and market context

Triple-A positions the product as bridging traditional banking rails with cryptocurrency settlement options. The company is registered with the U.S. Financial Crimes Enforcement Network and holds licences across jurisdictions including Singapore and Europe, an important point given the heightened regulatory attention on stablecoins and cross-border transfers.

Stablecoins have been promoted as a way to speed settlement and reduce foreign exchange overheads, but widespread commercial adoption depends on robust on- and off-ramps to fiat. Providers that focus narrowly on stablecoin rails can struggle to offer local collection capabilities; conversely, traditional payment providers often lack direct access to digital-asset settlement. Triple-A’s pitch is that combining both capabilities in one system addresses a practical market gap.

Industry implications and risks

In practice, the impact of products like Multicurrency Accounts will hinge on several factors. First, bank and regulator acceptance of named IBAN flows routed through non-EU entities will determine how broadly firms can rely on these accounts. Second, counterparty, custody and AML controls around stablecoin conversions remain a focus for regulators and corporate treasurers, affecting how quickly large enterprises will shift liquidity into tokenised rails.

Operationally, bringing collection and payout into a single ledger can simplify reconciliation and lower per-transaction costs, which matters for platforms with many small payouts. It also creates a clearer technical path for firms that want optionality between fiat and token settlement depending on corridor economics.

How it fits into the competitive landscape

Triple-A’s announcement highlights a broader industry trend: providers seeking to stitch together fiat rails, banking relationships and tokenised settlement to offer end-to-end cross-border payment services. While some market participants specialise in stablecoin settlement and others in local-rail collection, the value proposition here rests on integration and coverage.

The company says the offering is intended for a range of customers, including B2B merchants selling into Europe, exporters, platforms that collect and disburse funds for users and other payment service providers or electronic money institutions seeking to add euro collections to their stacks. Triple-A also indicates plans to expand collection capabilities to include U.S. dollar and Singapore dollar accounts in the future.

Takeaway

Triple-A’s Multicurrency Accounts represent a practical step toward reducing friction in euro collections and global payouts by combining SEPA access with stablecoin rails. The product could ease market entry for non-EU firms selling into Europe and provide platforms with a unified path from collection to payout. However, the broader adoption will depend on regulatory acceptance, counterparty controls and how cost savings compare with traditional banking and payment-provider alternatives.

For corporates and fintechs evaluating cross-border architectures, the announcement underscores the growing focus on hybrid solutions that marry established banking rails with digital-asset settlement to deliver faster, more predictable global payments.

Helium founder Amir Haleem has stepped down as chief executive of Nova Labs after HNT’s price suffered a steep multi-year decline and the company sold its consumer mobile business.

According to Haleem’s announcement on X, Mario Di Dio has taken over as CEO of Nova Labs, while Haleem has moved into the chairman role. The leadership change came as HNT remained under heavy pressure, with the token down 96% over five years and another 15% on the day of Haleem’s exit, according to the market data cited in the report.

Helium mobile sale fails to lift HNT

Nova Labs completed the sale of Helium Mobile to Noble Mobile on June 2, 2026, according to the company update cited in the report. The sale came two days before Haleem announced his resignation as CEO.

Helium Mobile had become one of the project’s more visible consumer products after Nova Labs tried to connect crypto incentives with low-cost cellphone service. Still, the HNT token did not recover after the sale. According to the report, HNT stayed down 30% over the week and 46% over the month.

At the same time, Helium’s other tokens also remained far below earlier levels. MOBILE has fallen 76% over five years, while IOT has dropped 87%, according to the price figures cited in the report. Nova Labs issued the tokens to reward operators of Helium-linked networking devices.

Haleem says he still holds HNT

In his departure message, Haleem said he still holds HNT, according to the report. His statement came after years of public comments in which he promoted the long-term case for Helium and its token-backed network model.

Some users on X described his move to chairman as a deserved break after a long run, according to the report. Others focused on HNT’s price history and the timing of his exit, especially after the company sold Helium Mobile without a recovery in the token.

The leadership handover also closed a major chapter for Nova Labs. Haleem spent more than a decade building Helium’s wireless network concept, which used crypto rewards to encourage people to run hardware devices that supported the system.

Nova Labs leaves behind years of controversy

Helium raised nearly $365 million over its lifetime, with FTX listed among its backers, according to the report. In 2022, the company faced criticism after it advertised Lime, Salesforce, and Nestlé as network users, although those companies were not using the network.

A Forbes investigation later reported that insiders mined close to half of all HNT during the token’s early months. The SEC sued Nova Labs in January 2025 under then-chair Gary Gensler, accusing the company of making materially false and misleading statements about users, including Lime, Nestlé, and Salesforce.

After Paul Atkins took over the SEC under President Donald Trump, Nova Labs settled the case in April 2025. According to the report, Nova Labs paid a $200,000 civil penalty tied to one misrepresentation charge, while the SEC dismissed the remaining claims with prejudice.

Brad Sherman has criticized proposals to distribute government payments through stablecoins, warning during a congressional hearing that such a system could support tax evasion while lawmakers simultaneously advance several new crypto tax proposals.

According to remarks delivered during a House Financial Services Committee hearing on oversight of federal banking regulators, U.S. Representative Brad Sherman argued that using stablecoins for government payments would create risks that outweigh any potential benefits.

The criticism came after National Credit Union Administration Chairman Kyle Hauptman suggested that stablecoins could improve the speed of government disbursements.

Hauptman told lawmakers that dollar-pegged tokens operate around the clock, allowing tax refunds and emergency payments to reach recipients outside traditional banking hours, including weekends and holidays.

Responding to the proposal, Sherman said he could not think of a worse idea and argued that government-backed stablecoin payments would legitimize what he described as an alternative system designed to facilitate tax evasion.

Sherman also raised concerns about yield-bearing stablecoins, stating that legal professionals were already searching for ways to work around restrictions on interest payments and urging regulators to develop rules capable of preventing such outcomes.

Stablecoin tax rules remain under review

Sherman’s comments arrive as Congress examines how stablecoins should be treated under U.S. tax law.

As reported earlier by crypto.news, the House Ways and Means Committee recently released seven discussion drafts covering digital asset taxation ahead of a June 9 hearing.

According to crypto journalist Eleanor Terrett, the package includes proposals addressing stablecoins, staking rewards, mining income, DeFi lending, wash-sale rules, charitable donations and a voluntary disclosure program for unresolved crypto tax reporting.

Among the proposals is a provision that could allow compliant stablecoins to receive de minimis treatment for small gains and losses generated through everyday transactions. The measure would separate certain low-value payments from speculative crypto trading activity for tax purposes.

Lawmakers have previously explored similar concepts through the bipartisan Digital Asset Protection, Accountability, Regulation, Innovation, Taxation and Yields Act, known as the PARITY Act.

According to Representative Steven Horsford’s office, that proposal included a deemed-basis rule that would treat regulated payment stablecoins more like cash while incorporating protections against trading and arbitrage abuse.

Regulators outline banking and compliance plans

Elsewhere during the hearing, federal regulators discussed the implementation of stablecoin oversight requirements established under the GENIUS Act.

FDIC Chairman Travis Hill said regulators are preparing customer identification requirements for stablecoin issuers and indicated that proposed rules could be released soon.

At the same hearing, Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould defended the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s handling of a national trust bank charter application submitted by Trump-linked World Liberty Financial.

The exchange became tense after Representative Gregory Meeks questioned Gould’s independence and asked whether he was acting on behalf of the public or the Trump family.

Gould rejected the criticism, describing the comments as unprecedented and saying the pressure he had experienced came from lawmakers rather than political figures connected to the administration.

The regulatory discussion unfolded as crypto firms continue to gain access to traditional banking infrastructure. Falcon Finance launched its fUSD stablecoin with Anchorage Digital, the first federally chartered crypto bank, while crypto exchange Kraken recently received a Federal Reserve master account with certain limitations.

Separately, World Liberty Financial said last month that it was in the final stages of obtaining conditional approval for its banking charter application.

The US House Ways and Means Committee moved the dial on digital asset taxation by circulating seven discussion draft bills ahead of a key hearing on the topic. The set of proposals touches on stablecoins, mining, staking, and everyday crypto transactions, signaling a bipartisan effort to clarify how the IRS should treat crypto activities and reduce the tax-reporting burden for users.

Chairing the committee, Rep. Jason Smith, and other lawmakers presented the drafts as a step toward more predictable tax rules for participants across the crypto ecosystem. The package aims to ease paperwork for crypto holders, provide clearer treatment for mining and staking activities, and potentially create a “de minimis” reporting exception for small-value transactions. The drafts were released in advance of a Tuesday hearing dedicated to digital asset taxation, underscoring Congress’s ongoing focus on how these assets should be taxed as activity and adoption expand.

Key takeaways

• The Ways and Means package signals a push to reduce annual tax paperwork for crypto holders while clarifying the tax treatment of mining and staking tokens.
• A de minimis reporting approach for small crypto transactions is on the table, with lawmakers exploring thresholds that would ease reporting requirements for ordinary transfers.
• The PARITY Act earlier proposed a $200 reporting threshold for stablecoins, while excluding a similar threshold for other cryptocurrencies such as Bitcoin.
• Any legislation advancing these ideas will require bipartisan support in both chambers to become law, with the Senate weighing its own priorities alongside a broader tax agenda.
• State-level signals are emerging, notably in Illinois, where a new budget includes a digital asset tax provision that would apply to brokered transactions.

What the proposals seek to change

The seven draft bills circulated by the committee address several recurring pain points for the tax treatment of digital assets. One throughline is reducing the formal reporting burden on individuals who hold or transact with cryptocurrencies. By reexamining the way taxable events are defined and reported, lawmakers appear intent on reducing friction for routine crypto activity while preserving revenue integrity for the federal government.

Another focus is clarity around mining and staking activities. Mining uses energy-intensive processes to validate and record transactions, while staking typically involves locking up tokens to participate in network consensus. The drafts indicate an intent to provide clearer rules for how gains from these activities should be taxed, and under what circumstances, avoiding ambiguity that has long puzzled taxpayers and practitioners alike.

Alongside these aims, the drafts contemplate a de minimis reporting exemption for small-value transactions. The idea is to spare ordinary retail transfers from triggering onerous tax reporting, a concept that has gained traction in policy circles as a way to curb friction without eroding tax base.

In parallel to the House effort, a March draft law known as the Digital Asset PARITY Act proposed a specific threshold for stablecoins—around $200—for reporting purposes. Importantly, the PARITY Act did not extend a similar threshold to other cryptocurrencies like Bitcoin, illustrating the nuanced approach lawmakers are exploring for different classes of digital assets. The proposal drew a pointed reaction from industry stakeholders who argued for broader tax clarity to encourage onshore compliance, as noted by The Digital Chamber’s CEO in commentary linked to the PARITY Act.

As part of the policy discourse, Wyoming Senator Cynthia Lummis has signaled interest in a de minimis exemption for Bitcoin transactions that could operate in tandem with federal efforts. Her team has discussed a potential $300 de minimis threshold in connection with capital gains taxes, building on a framework she has introduced in other contexts. These items underscore the cross-chamber tension between ensuring tax compliance and avoiding overbearing reporting requirements that could suppress legitimate onshore activity.

Policy path and the Senate’s timetable

While the House effort concentrates on tax clarity and administrative relief, the Senate’s agenda appears more constrained by broader budget considerations and a longer-running debate over a digital asset market framework. Senate lawmakers are expected to prioritize a budget reconciliation package before evaluating a proposed market structure bill commonly referred to as the CLARITY Act. This sequencing means that any House-passed proposals would need substantial bipartisan support to survive the Senate’s scrutiny and potential revisions.

The dynamic highlights a familiar pattern in Washington: a flurry of activity around digital asset tax policy, followed by protracted inter-chamber negotiations over how to balance investor protections, innovation, and revenue requirements. For market participants, the timing and scope of bipartisan broadening of tax clarity will matter, not just the specifics of any single draft. The Tuesday hearing in the House provides a venue for lawmakers to hear from witnesses and stakeholders as they shape a path forward.

Source coverage points to ongoing industry calls for simpler reporting and more predictable guidance. The crypto policy debate has long centered on how to treat mining and staking activities, whether stablecoins should be given a distinct treatment, and how to avoid stifling everyday on-ramps with heavy reporting burdens. The new drafts reflect an attempt to translate those concerns into concrete legislative language, even as lawmakers acknowledge the need for cooperation across party lines to move from discussion to law.

Illinois moves on digital asset taxation

Beyond federal activity, state-level developments are surfacing as well. This week, the Illinois General Assembly approved a $56 billion state budget that includes provisions imposing a digital asset tax. If Governor JB Pritzker signs the budget into law, crypto users would face a 0.2% tax on transactions conducted through brokers registered with the state. The measure signals how state-level tax policy could complement or complicate federal efforts, especially for residents and businesses with cross-border activity or localized crypto activity in jurisdictions with different tax regimes.

These shifts at both federal and state levels illustrate a broader trend: policymakers are moving from high-level debates about crypto’s legality and morality toward concrete tax policy levers that could affect everyday users. The interplay between de minimis thresholds, mining and staking clarity, and state tax incentives or thresholds will likely shape how investors and infrastructure builders approach compliance and reporting in the near term.

Why this matters for investors, users, and builders

From an investor perspective, clearer tax rules and potential reporting relief can reduce compliance risk and operating costs, particularly for individuals who hold a diversified mix of digital assets or participate in staking and yield-generating activities. For miners and staking participants, explicit guidance on when income is recognized and how gains are calculated can influence decision-making around deployment and asset selection, especially in a climate of rising energy costs and evolving network economics.

For developers and platforms, the material implications extend to how on-chain transactions are categorized and reported. Clarified thresholds and definitions can improve user experiences by reducing friction in tax reporting while maintaining transparency about taxable events. At the same time, the ongoing policy tug-of-war—between tighter reporting for some asset classes and looser requirements for small transfers—will continue to shape product design, KYC/AML considerations, and record-keeping tooling across the ecosystem.

As the dialogue moves forward, readers should watch for two near-term developments: whether the House’s seven-draft package gains momentum toward formal legislation, and how the Senate harmonizes its approach with federal reconciliation processes and the CLARITY Act. The Illinois framework, meanwhile, provides a real-world test case for how state tax regimes may interact with federal policy and influence local crypto activity. The coming months will reveal how these threads converge into a coherent and durable tax structure for digital assets.

Sources and context for this overview reflect coverage of the committee’s discussion drafts, the PARITY Act debate, and state-level developments as reported in Cointelegraph and related policy reporting. For readers seeking to explore the original materials, the Ways and Means Committee’s hearing page and the PARITY Act coverage offer additional detail on the proposals and their rationale.

SpaceX has secured a major compute agreement withGoogle ahead of its planned Nasdaq listing, adding another large customer to its expanding AI infrastructure business.

A regulatory filing by SpaceX said Google will pay the company $920 million per month from October 2026 through June 2029 for access to about 110,000 NVIDIA GPUs, CPUs, memory, and other related equipment. The filing said Google’s access will begin at a lower fee as the service ramps up through September.

Google turns to SpaceX for AI capacity

The agreement comes as Google faces rising demand for its AI products. In a statement, a Google representative said Google Cloud and SpaceX have worked together for years and described the contract as a short-term capacity arrangement.

According to Google, demand for its agent platform, Gemini Enterprise, has been higher than expected. The company said the SpaceX deal will provide bridge capacity while it works to meet customer needs.

Unlike Anthropic, Google already controls one of the world’s largest AI compute footprints, according to outside estimates cited in the report. However, Alphabet’s own spending plans show the pressure created by the AI race. Alphabet has committed more than $180 billion in capital expenditures this year and has said spending will rise significantly in 2027. The company also recently announced an $80 billion equity sale.

Deal follows Anthropic agreement

SpaceX’s new contract with Google follows a similar deal announced in late May with Anthropic. Under that agreement, Anthropic agreed to pay SpaceX $1.25 billion per month through 2029 for compute capacity from the Colossus 1 data center near Memphis, Tennessee.

The report said Colossus 1 was originally built by xAI, which is now part of SpaceX, for its own artificial intelligence work. Anthropic raised usage limits on the same day its deal with SpaceX was announced, after facing compute limits before the agreement.

Google’s deal appears to cover about half the compute made available to Anthropic at Colossus 1. SpaceX did not identify which data center Google will use. Elon Musk has previously said Colossus 2 may be reserved for xAI, according to the report.

Cancellation terms give both sides flexibility

The regulatory filing said both SpaceX and Google can terminate the agreement with 90 days’ notice after December 31, 2026. The filing also includes a delivery condition tied to GPU access.

If SpaceX fails to provide the committed GPU capacity by September 30, 2026, Google may end the agreement after a one-month grace period, according to the filing. Google may also accept the available number of GPUs and receive a reduction in monthly fees.

IPO plans add weight to compute strategy

SpaceX announced the Google agreement one week before its stock is expected to begin trading on Nasdaq. SEC paperwork shows the company plans to raise about $75 billion at a valuation near $1.75 trillion, which would make it the largest IPO in history.

Google is already a long-time SpaceX investor. Its stake is expected to be worth more than $100 billion after the listing, according to the report. The two companies are also reportedly discussing orbital data centers, a project tied to SpaceX’s plans after the IPO.

Digital asset treasury companies have come under fresh pressure as the crypto market slump has pushed major bitcoin, ether, and Solana holders into large unrealized losses.

Artemis data shows that Hyperliquid-focused treasury firms are the only major group still holding meaningful paper gains, even after HYPE pulled back from its record high above $74 earlier this week.

The contrast has become sharper in the first half of 2026, as several public companies that copied the crypto treasury model now face deep losses on their token positions. Companies built around bitcoin, ether, and Solana reserves are carrying billions of dollars in unrealized losses, while HYPE treasury firms remain positive for now.

Hyperliquid Treasuries Stay Ahead

According to Artemis, Hyperliquid Strategies holds about 23.7 million HYPE and still has more than $1.1 billion in unrealized gains. The gain remains even after HYPE fell 11.98% during the latest market pullback.

Hyperion DeFi, which disclosed just over 2 million HYPE in its latest SEC filing, also remains in profit. Artemis estimates the company has about $35 million in unrealized gains on its HYPE holdings.

The figures separate HYPE treasury firms from most other digital asset treasury companies. Artemis data shows that treasury firms tied to bitcoin, ether, and Solana are now dealing with major paper losses as crypto prices trade near multi-year lows.

Strategy Leads Bitcoin Treasury Losses

SaylorTracker data shows Strategy, formerly MicroStrategy, now holds more than $12.8 billion in unrealized bitcoin losses. The company helped popularize the corporate bitcoin treasury model and remains the largest public bitcoin holder.

Strategy began buying bitcoin when the asset traded near $10,000, but SaylorTracker data shows its average acquisition cost has climbed to about $75,000 per BTC after years of purchases.

The company’s position has moved sharply over the past year. When bitcoin topped $126,000 last October, Strategy had more than $14 billion in unrealized gains. SaylorTracker data later showed those gains turned into about $9.5 billion in losses in February before briefly returning to positive territory in April.

This week, Strategy said it sold 32 bitcoins for $2.5 billion. After that announcement, bitcoin fell toward $59,100 on Friday afternoon, leaving Strategy with a paper loss of about 20% on its holdings. MSTR shares were down more than 11% on Friday near $116, close to a two-year low.

Ether Treasury Firms Face Heavy Paper Losses

Ethereum treasury companies are also under pressure after ETH fell below $1,550 on Friday, its lowest level in more than a year.

Artemis estimates that Bitmine, chaired by Fundstrat’s Tom Lee, has about $10.5 billion in unrealized losses on more than 5.4 million ETH. At current prices, those holdings are worth about $8.6 billion.

Bitmine’s ETH position represents nearly 4.5% of Ethereum’s circulating supply. The company has previously said it wants to raise that figure to 5%. BMNR shares fell more than 10% on Friday to around $16, their lowest level since the firm launched its ether treasury strategy in June 2025.

Sharplink, another major ether treasury company, holds nearly 869,000 ETH. Artemis data estimates its paper loss at about $1.8 billion.

Solana treasury firms have also taken losses as SOL fell below $65 on Friday, its weakest price since late 2023.

As previously reported by crypto.news Forward Industries, the largest public Solana treasury company, holds more than 6.8 million SOL. Artemis data estimates the company now has about $1.2 billion in unrealized losses on those holdings.

The latest data shows how the digital asset treasury trade has split between HYPE-linked winners and larger crypto treasury firms facing heavy losses.

Bitcoin has fallen to nearly $59,000 after dropping more than 20% in a week, prompting Michael Saylor to respond publicly after CNBC host Jim Cramer blamed him for the cryptocurrency’s latest selloff.

Posting on X as Bitcoin (BTC) slid below the $60,000 level, Jim Cramer wrote that “Saylor murdered Bitcoin,” pointing to Strategy’s recent Bitcoin sale and the market’s sharp decline. The comment came after Bitcoin suffered over $450 million in long liquidations and reached its lowest level in almost two years.

Responding shortly afterward, Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor dismissed the accusation, writing that the decline was “just a flesh wound.”

Strategy disclosed earlier this week that it sold 32 BTC after trading opened on Monday. Although the transaction represented only a tiny fraction of the company’s Bitcoin holdings, the move attracted attention because Saylor has spent years publicly advocating a buy-and-hold approach toward the asset. Bitcoin and Strategy shares both came under pressure following the disclosure.

As reported earlier by crypto.news, Cramer argued that the sale altered investor perceptions of Bitcoin’s previous rally. According to his remarks, many traders had viewed Strategy’s aggressive accumulation program as an important source of support for the market.

He described the company as a key factor behind Bitcoin’s rise, while stopping short of calling the situation market manipulation.

Advertisement

ETF outflows have drawn scrutiny from analysts

Several market observers pushed back against the idea that Strategy’s sale was responsible for Bitcoin’s decline.

CryptoQuant CEO Ki Young Ju argued that focusing on Saylor overlooks much larger selling activity from long-term Bitcoin holders. 

“Can we really compare the 1.24M BTC that OG whales sold to Saylor and ETFs over the past two years with the 32 BTC Saylor sold?”

Ju added that Bitcoin would likely be trading at lower levels today without purchases from Strategy and spot Bitcoin ETFs.

While Ju rejected claims that Saylor caused the downturn, he said he remained open to evidence-based analysis challenging his view. In his assessment, blaming Strategy for Bitcoin’s collapse was unsupported by available market data.

Advertisement

Citigroup analysts reached a similar conclusion in a recent note. According to the bank, investors may be paying too much attention to Strategy’s sale while overlooking persistent withdrawals from U.S. spot Bitcoin exchange-traded funds.

Data from SoSoValue showed spot Bitcoin ETFs recorded $2.43 billion in net outflows during May. Another $1.40 billion left the funds during the first three days of June. Citigroup said ETF demand remains one of the most important drivers of Bitcoin prices and suggested those outflows have had a much larger impact on market performance.

Concerns remain around Strategy’s funding model

Elsewhere, some analysts focused less on the sale itself and more on what it could signal about Strategy’s future.

Economist Peter Schiff argued that Strategy’s Bitcoin treasury model depends heavily on its ability to continue raising capital through equity markets. According to Schiff, the company could face increasing pressure if MSTR shares lose their premium and make future fundraising more difficult.

A separate report from Grayscale Research also highlighted potential funding challenges. Grayscale said declining prices for MSTR and STRC shares could make it harder for Strategy to expand its Bitcoin holdings. The firm added that if STRC trades below its intended level, Strategy may need to increase dividend payments, raising cash obligations and potentially increasing the likelihood of future Bitcoin sales.

Advertisement

Despite those concerns, Grayscale said a reduction in Bitcoin concentrated on highly leveraged corporate balance sheets could benefit the market over time by spreading ownership across more treasury companies.

Meanwhile, Charles Schwab Director of Digital Currencies Research and Strategy Jim Ferraioli argued that the market may be searching for a simple explanation for a trend that began months ago.

According to Ferraioli, Bitcoin has been in a bear market since October 2025, when it reached nearly $126,000 before entering a prolonged decline.

Ferraioli said Bitcoin’s weakness stems primarily from the loss of momentum that previously attracted capital into the asset. Because Strategy’s sale occurred near the end of an eight-month downtrend, he argued it is difficult to identify the transaction as the main cause of Bitcoin’s latest losses.

Advertisement

Strategy’s disclosure of a 32 Bitcoin move reverberated through the market, underscoring a shift in the narrative around corporate Bitcoin treasuries. The sale, described as a small fraction of Michael Saylor’s firm’s vast holdings, nonetheless chipped away at the prevailing assumption that corporate BTC reserves would remain permanently locked up. In the days that followed, investors re-evaluated the Bitcoin treasury thesis, even as Strategy’s broader treasury strategy remains, for now, firmly anchored in accumulating BTC per share. This episode arrived alongside a broader set of developments in crypto policy and corporate finance, painting a picture of a market navigating both strategic asset allocation and a tightening regulatory landscape.

In other corners of crypto news this week, JPMorgan Chase & Co. chief Jamie Dimon sharpened his critique of the industry’s evolving market structure proposals, while a French Bitcoin treasury vehicle pursued a sweeping fundraising mandate that would dramatically expand its war chest for Bitcoin purchases. Taken together, the week highlighted how treasury management, regulatory expectations, and capital formation are increasingly interlinked in shaping near-term price action and long-run adoption.

Key takeaways

• Strategy disclosed the sale of 32 BTC, its first reported liquidation outside a 2022 tax event, triggering a reassessment of the firm’s Bitcoin treasury thesis.
• Delphi Digital argued the market has begun to view Strategy as no longer a pure “buy and never sell” vehicle, signaling a structural shift in how Bitcoin treasuries are valued by investors.
• Regulatory discourse intensified as Jamie Dimon said banks would oppose the latest CLARITY Act markup, highlighting a widening rift between traditional finance and crypto innovation on compliance and product offerings.
• Capital B is seeking shareholder approval to expand its fundraising capacity to issue up to 5 billion euros in new equity and about $116 billion in credit instruments to finance future Bitcoin purchases, potentially expanding its BTC stack well beyond current levels.
• Coinbase joined the wave of institutional interest in stablecoin reserves by investing in ProShares GENIUS Money Market ETF (IQMM), signaling appetite for regulated, reserve-backed exposure tied to stablecoins under the GENIUS Act framework.

Strategy’s liquidity rethink tests the “never-sell” meme

The 32 BTC sale announced by Strategy, led by Michael Saylor’s corporate vehicle, represented a modest slice of its total holdings—yet it had outsized consequences for market psychology. The company’s BTC reserve is widely cited as a central pillar of its valuation framework, and the move punctured the dominant narrative that Strategy would only accumulate more coins with no intention to divest. The event helped catalyze a broader debate about how to price Bitcoin treasury models when corporate treasuries face ordinary liquidity needs and risk management concerns.

Reports surrounding the sale noted that Strategy’s overall balance sheet remains vastly weighted toward Bitcoin; the liquidation was the first non-tax-related sale publicly disclosed since 2022. After the disclosure, Strategy’s stock price came under pressure as investors recalibrated expectations about the long-term Bitcoin-per-share metric. Delphi Digital captured the moment, noting in a market summary that “the market learned that Strategy is no longer read as a pure one-way accumulation vehicle.” The message, they added, is no longer confined to conference calls but is reflected in actual trading behavior.

For investors, the episode raises important questions about how to value Bitcoin treasuries when even the most committed holders confront the realities of operating a business—whether it’s funding operations, meeting debt obligations, or pursuing strategic investments. It also invites a broader assessment of whether the “buy and hold” narrative remains a valid framework for evaluating corporate crypto warehouses, especially as markets become more sophisticated about risk-adjusted returns and liquidity planning. The episode doesn’t erase Strategy’s long-standing commitment to Bitcoin per share, but it does remind the market that crypto treasuries are not immune to the same financial pressures that affect any large corporate balance sheet.

The public thread of the narrative remains: even high-conviction holders will occasionally depart from a strict accumulation path when the business case for liquidity or strategic diversification presents itself. The broader takeaway for market participants is that Bitcoin’s role as a corporate treasury asset is evolving from a simple store of value into a more nuanced instrument—one that must be balanced against operating needs, debt covenants, and investor expectations.

Source: Michael Saylor

Regulatory battlegrounds heat up as CLARITY Act debate deepens

Beyond corporate treasury moves, the policy arena is heating up around the envisioned market framework for crypto. JPMorgan CEO Jamie Dimon publicly signaled opposition to the latest CLARITY Act markup, arguing that crypto companies deserve the same regulatory scrutiny as conventional banks and should not be afforded privileged treatment merely for offering certain products. In particular, Dimon targeted provisions that would permit crypto firms to provide interest-bearing products while avoiding the capital and compliance burdens traditionally borne by banks. The remarks added to a broader chorus of critics who warn that such exemptions could create inequities within the financial system.

Supporters of the CLARITY Act contend that a clear, modern regulatory framework would spur innovation and provide certainty for consumers and businesses alike. They describe the act as a necessary step toward standardizing oversight, protecting investors, and clarifying the status of crypto markets in the U.S. The debate underscores a central tension: how to reconcile rapid innovation with prudent risk management and consumer protections. As lawmakers push for market structure legislation, the contours of the policy landscape will continue to influence how institutions engage with digital assets and how new products—ranging from stablecoins to tokenized services—are designed and offered to the public.

Jamie Dimon said the banking industry opposes the latest CLARITY markup. Source: Fox Business

Capital B’s ambitious fundraising plan and its BTC ambitions

Capital B, the French-based Bitcoin treasury company, is seeking shareholder approval to dramatically expand its capital-raising capacity. The plan would authorize the company to issue up to 5 billion euros in new equity and to raise roughly $116 billion in credit instruments to finance future Bitcoin purchases. If approved at the June 17 meeting, management would gain access to a far larger pool of capital than the company has previously raised, a move that could accelerate Bitcoin accumulation during periods of price weakness or volatility.

Capital B has already accumulated a sizable BTC position, reporting holdings of 3,139 BTC after adding 4 BTC in a recent period. The company disclosed it had purchased 192 BTC for $15.2 million in a prior month, reflecting a steady cadence of adds alongside its fundraising ambitions. The scale of the contemplated capital raise would give Capital B the option to accelerate purchases during market dips or to diversify its treasury strategy through more dynamic asset deployment. The potential implications for BTC supply dynamics and market psychology are meaningful, especially if other treasury-focused firms consider similar fundraising moves in response to shifting market conditions.

These developments come amid a broader European and global push to establish clear regulatory parameters for stablecoin-related activity and digital asset institutions. If Capital B can access a much larger capital base, it could become a more prominent participant in the Bitcoin market, potentially influencing price discovery during episodes of liquidity constraints or bursty demand.

Source: Alexandre Laizet

Institutional appetite for stablecoin reserves grows with GENIUS Act momentum

In another sign of growing institutional interest in the mechanics of stablecoin collateral, Coinbase disclosed an investment in ProShares GENIUS Money Market ETF (IQMM). The fund is designed to hold cash equivalents and other highly liquid assets that would qualify as stablecoin reserves under the GENIUS Act—the proposed framework that would require stablecoins to be backed by high-quality, liquid reserves. ProShares notes that the ETF aims to provide exposure to cash, bank deposits, and short-term U.S. Treasury securities, aligning with the asset mix that stablecoin issuers typically earmark to back their tokens.

The investment by Coinbase signals ongoing demand from regulated exchanges and fintechs for vehicles that implement reserve-asset standards envisioned by the GENIUS Act. By supporting a vehicle intended to hold compliant reserves, Coinbase illustrates a path for traditional market participants to participate more directly in the stablecoin ecosystem while adhering to evolving regulatory expectations. For market observers, this development underscores growing institutional interest in structured products tied to stablecoin reserves—an area likely to gain further attention as the regulatory framework for digital assets gradually coalesces.

The GENIUS Act and the broader push to codify reserve requirements for stablecoins are part of a larger effort to create a federally grounded framework that can accommodate rapidly evolving use cases—from payments to settlement and beyond. As institutions seek greater certainty and safer exposure to the stablecoin segment, products tied to reserve assets may become a focal point for capital allocation and risk management in crypto markets.

Source: ProShares

Crypto Biz continues to track how corporate treasuries, regulatory developments, and institutional finance converge to shape the crypto landscape. What unfolds next will hinge on policy decisions in Washington and Brussels, the pace of adoption of regulated investment vehicles, and the willingness of major players to adjust treasury strategies in response to market dynamics.

As Congress and regulators refine market structure proposals and as major treasury entities calibrate their holdings, readers should watch for official guidance on reserve standards, as well as any shifts in large-scale buy-and-hold narratives as real-world liquidity needs pressure even the most steadfast BTC holders.