Bitcoin Core 32.0 has entered its final release-candidate testing cycle after developers tagged v32.0rc1 on Sept. 14, bringing fee estimation, block-validation performance and security fixes closer to a planned Oct. 10 release.

The Bitcoin Core project’s official GitHub release shows v32.0rc1 at commit d0231bb, signed with a verified maintainer signature on Sept. 14 at 12:58 UTC. The project’s release schedule still targets Oct. 10 for the final v32.0 tag, although the date remains subject to testing and further fixes.

Version 32 focuses on node software behavior, wallet interfaces, fee calculation, networking and performance. The draft release notes do not list a change to Bitcoin’s consensus rules, meaning the update does not redefine which transactions or blocks the network considers valid.

U.S. lawmakers moved closer to formalizing President Donald Trump’s plan for a government-held Bitcoin program after the American Reserve Modernization Act of 2026 cleared the House Committee on Financial Services.

The bill, H.R. 8957, passed the committee on Wednesday in a 28–21 vote and would create a “Strategic Bitcoin Reserve” alongside a separate “Digital Asset Stockpile” at the Department of the Treasury. These reserves would cover federally held Bitcoin and other digital assets acquired through criminal or civil forfeiture.

Key takeaways

• The American Reserve Modernization Act of 2026 (H.R. 8957) advanced after a 28–21 vote in the House Financial Services Committee.
• It would set up Treasury-managed structures for forfeited Bitcoin and other digital assets, including a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve.
• Bitcoin held under the reserve would be required to remain in federal custody for at least 20 years.
• The bill includes mandatory accounting and transparency steps, such as quarterly “proof of reserve” reporting and third-party audits.
• While it formalizes federal custody, the text also emphasizes private ownership and self-custody rights for Bitcoin.

What H.R. 8957 would change for federal Bitcoin custody

H.R. 8957 aims to convert the concept of a strategic federal Bitcoin reserve into law. According to the bill’s framework described in coverage, the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and Digital Asset Stockpile would sit within the U.S. Treasury and would apply to digital assets the government already holds or acquires through forfeiture proceedings.

Supporters argue that current federal storage practices are too fragmented to satisfy modern security and accountability standards. Representative Nicholas Begich, who introduced the legislation on May 21, said the federal government cannot allow Bitcoin to sit in inconsistent custody arrangements. He also argued that the approach creates cybersecurity risks and does not provide adequate accounting of what the government actually owns.

Accounting, transparency, and the “proof of reserve” requirement

A central feature of ARMA is accountability. The legislation would require federal agencies to deliver a complete accounting of digital assets they currently hold or control. It also sets out transparency measures intended to make federal crypto holdings easier to verify.

Under the bill, quarterly “proof of reserve” reports and third-party audits would be required. For investors and market participants, the significance is straightforward: clearer documentation around government-held supply can reduce uncertainty, support more reliable on-chain and off-chain reconciliation, and improve confidence in claims about who controls what.

The bill would also support a study into budget-neutral acquisition strategies for expanding the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, a detail that matters because it frames future additions as an exercise in managing costs rather than an open-ended authorization.

How long Bitcoin would be held—and what remains under federal control

Another notable provision would require Bitcoin in the federal reserve to be held for a minimum of 20 years. That long time horizon suggests the legislation is designed less for short-term policy flexibility and more for creating a durable, long-lived component of federal reserves.

The bill would further direct that states be allowed to store their Bitcoin in the Federal Reserve, extending the idea of institutional custody beyond the federal government alone.

At the same time, the legislation includes language that preserves private participation in Bitcoin. It affirms private ownership and the right to self-custody, describing control of private keys as “fundamental to the principles of financial sovereignty, privacy, and personal liberty in the digital age.” That emphasis may be intended to assuage concerns that government custody could translate into broader restrictions on individual holding or managing Bitcoin.

Why the committee vote matters, and what comes next

Committee approval is a procedural milestone, not the end of the legislative process. After passing the House Committee on Financial Services, H.R. 8957 still must clear the full House and the Senate before it can reach the president’s desk.

The bill’s progress also arrives as observers continue to track how much Bitcoin the U.S. government holds. According to Arkham Intelligence, the U.S. government is estimated to hold 324,527 Bitcoin, valued at $24.7 billion at the time of writing. While estimates like this can evolve with new data, they underline why a clearer policy framework around government-held Bitcoin is likely to draw broad attention from both policymakers and market participants.

Policy advocates have already characterized the effort as historically significant for Bitcoin governance. Bitcoin Policy Institute executive director Connor Brown called the development a “genuinely historic step for Bitcoin policy” on X. Similarly, Strive CEO Matt Cole described it as potentially the single most important crypto legislation that could emerge from Washington, also posting on X.

Looking ahead: the details that could determine real-world impact

For now, the decisive next phase is whether lawmakers can move ARMA through both chambers, where amendments are likely and the exact implementation of quarterly “proof of reserve” reporting and custody rules could become a focal point. Investors and builders should watch for how the final bill defines custody, audits, and the mechanics of “budget-neutral” expansion—because those specifics will shape how credible, verifiable, and operationally workable the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve becomes.

Most people searching for a no-kyc crypto exchange alternative are not looking for less compliance, they are looking for less exposure. Less counterparty risk. Less reliance on a custodian that could be hacked, frozen, or insolvent when they need their funds.

Vymopay is a non-custodial digital asset platform built entirely inside Telegram. “Non-custodial” means users hold their own private keys, no third party controls or can freeze their assets. The platform covers wallet management, privacy, exchange, loans, staking, AML screening, and payment infrastructure, all from the Telegram bot @Vymopay_bot, with no separate app to install.

This is a full breakdown of what each feature does and who it is built for.

The wallet: up to 500 addresses per asset

The base layer is a multi-currency, non-custodial wallet. Users hold their own keys and manage balances directly from the bot. That part is standard. What is less standard is the address ceiling: up to 500 dedicated wallet addresses per supported cryptocurrency.

For an individual holder, that ceiling is irrelevant. For a merchant or payment processor, it changes the operational picture entirely. A single shared receiving address requires manual reconciliation after every inbound payment. Five hundred dedicated addresses mean each customer or transaction type gets its own address, and attribution is automatic. The bookkeeping that would otherwise take hours is handled at the address layer.

This kind of address infrastructure is typically reserved for enterprise payment processors. Vymopay delivers it through a Telegram interface.

Shield Address: receive payments without revealing your wallet

Shield Address is the platform’s privacy feature, and the one most worth understanding carefully.

When a user withdraws from a centralized exchange (CEX) to a personal wallet, the exchange logs that destination address. That address is now permanently linked to the user’s exchange identity, every future transaction from it is traceable back to the exchange account. For users who want to keep their self-custody wallet separate from their exchange identity, that link is a problem.

Shield Address works as follows:

• Vymopay generates a dedicated Shield Address for the user.
• The user shares that address with the sender, an exchange, a counterparty, a client, instead of their real wallet.
• Vymopay receives the inbound funds and runs automatic AML screening on the transaction.
• Funds are forwarded to the user’s actual destination wallet. The sender never sees the real address.

The AML step is mandatory, not optional. Funds that fail screening do not proceed. This is the design distinction between a privacy tool and an evasion tool: Shield Address is built to protect users from counterparty surveillance, not to circumvent regulatory oversight. Privacy and compliance coexist in the same flow.

Shield Address also supports asset conversion at the forwarding stage — meaning funds can arrive in one cryptocurrency and be automatically converted before reaching the destination wallet.

Auto conversion address: accept any currency, receive your preferred one

Merchants often prefer to hold a specific asset — usually a stablecoin — regardless of what customers pay in. Auto Conversion Address handles the swap automatically. Each dedicated conversion address converts incoming funds to the preferred asset at current market prices, with a notification on each conversion. The receiving workflow does not change; the asset in the wallet does.

Exchange: market and limit orders from the bot

Vymopay includes a built-in exchange accessible from the same interface. No separate account. No external platform.

Two order types are available:

Balances update in real time after each trade.

For users already managing wallets, payments, and addresses inside the bot, being able to trade without switching platforms removes a step that previously required logging into a separate exchange.

Crypto loans: access liquidity without selling

Crypto Loans lets users borrow stablecoin liquidity against their crypto holdings without triggering a sale. The collateral asset stays in the user’s control; the loan is disbursed and repaid through the bot.

The practical use case: a user holds an asset they expect to appreciate but needs short-term liquidity. Selling triggers a taxable disposal and closes the position. A collateral-backed loan provides the liquidity without either consequence. Loan setup and repayment tracking run within the same interface.

Earn and staking: passive returns from the same interface

Users can stake supported cryptocurrencies directly from the bot and earn passive returns. Active positions, accumulated rewards, and pending requests are visible from the same interface used for everything else, no separate DeFi dashboard required.

AML protection: on-demand risk reports

For users who need to assess the risk profile of a wallet or transaction before interacting with it, Vymopay provides on-demand AML checks. Enter any wallet address and the platform generates a numeric risk score, a counterparty analysis by entity type, and a downloadable PDF report.

Checks run at any time, not only at account onboarding, which matters for businesses documenting due diligence, traders screening counterparties, and individuals receiving funds from unfamiliar sources.

AML screening is also embedded in the Shield Address forwarding flow — every inbound payment is screened before reaching the destination wallet.

Freeze Alert: continuous wallet monitoring

Freeze Alert runs continuous blockchain monitoring on selected wallets and sends real-time notifications if a freeze event is detected on-chain. It also generates recurring AML reports automatically over the subscription period.

Plans cover 1, 2, or 5 wallets. For businesses or individuals managing high-value wallets, this replaces the need to run manual checks, monitoring runs continuously without user action.

SWIFT Check: track international wire transfers

SWIFT Check lets users track international SWIFT transfers in real time using the UETR (Unique End-to-End Transaction Reference) identifier. For businesses managing cross-border payments, it replaces the back-and-forth of querying status through a banking portal. The check runs directly from the bot.

Affiliate program: recurring rewards, not one-time bonuses

Every user gets a personal referral code. Referring someone earns rewards each time that person transacts, recurring, tied to usage, not a flat sign-up bonus. Earnings are tracked and redeemable from the bot.

Who this is actually for

The best no-kyc crypto exchange alternative is not a single product, it depends on what you are replacing. Vymopay is built for:

• Individual holders moving off custodial exchanges who want self-custody without learning new tools.
• Traders who need an on-chain exchange, limit orders, and AML screening in one place.
• Merchants and businesses managing crypto payments across multiple customers or suppliers, where dedicated addresses and auto-conversion matter.
• Payment providers and finance teams who need compliance documentation, AML reports, Freeze Alert, SWIFT tracking, built into the same workflow.

The Telegram distribution is the practical bet behind that positioning. Over 900 million people use Telegram monthly. For those who already manage business and financial communication through the app, a full-featured crypto platform built inside it removes the adoption friction that has kept most self-custody tools niche.

The platform is accessible at @Vymopay_bot. No download required.

Strategy Executive Chairman Michael Saylor has predicted that the CLARITY Act’s 49-50 Senate defeat could send more capital toward Bitcoin as U.S. regulators continue writing crypto rules under their existing powers.

Michael Saylor said in an X post that the Securities and Exchange Commission, Commodity Futures Trading Commission, and Treasury Department could move forward under existing law while the CLARITY Act remains stalled.

“With CLARITY stalled, I expect the SEC, CFTC, and Treasury to advance rules under existing law,” Saylor wrote. “But progress does not have to wait for Congress.”

His comments presented the failed vote as a possible opening for Bitcoin rather than a complete halt to U.S. crypto policy. According to Saylor, banks could add more Bitcoin custody services and offer additional loans backed by the asset, creating new channels for capital to enter the market.

Saylor also pointed to the GENIUS Act, which has already established a federal framework for payment stablecoins. While discussing the remaining policy gap, he added, “The only clarity you need is Bitcoin.”

Saylor expects Bitcoin services to expand without the bill

For American investors, Saylor’s forecast centers on services offered through regulated financial institutions. More bank custody options could give clients another way to hold Bitcoin, while Bitcoin-backed loans could let borrowers access cash without immediately selling their holdings.

Saylor did not provide a timeline or name any banks preparing such products. His comments described what he expects regulators and financial institutions to do after Congress failed to advance the market-structure bill.

The Strategy chairman has repeatedly treated Bitcoin differently from other digital assets because of its regulatory position and fixed supply. In September, crypto.news previously reported that Saylor defended Americans’ right to promote the cryptocurrency while the Senate prepared for the CLARITY Act vote.

During that earlier debate, Saylor argued that public officials and business leaders should be free to support Bitcoin. The comments came as Strategy resumed purchases of the asset, tying his policy position to the company’s long-running Bitcoin treasury plan.

Strategy’s exposure also gives U.S. stock investors an indirect route into Bitcoin. Shares of the Nasdaq-listed company often react to changes in the cryptocurrency’s price, the company’s purchases and its methods of raising capital to fund additional acquisitions.

CLARITY Act fails its 60-vote Senate test

The Senate voted 49-50 on the motion to invoke cloture and move the CLARITY Act toward debate. With 60 votes required, the proposal fell 11 votes short of the threshold.

Failure at the procedural stage prevented senators from moving to a full debate and potential amendments. It was not a final vote on whether to approve the legislation.

The bill sought to establish federal rules for issuing, trading and supervising digital assets. One of its main provisions would divide authority between the SEC and CFTC, giving the agencies clearer roles over securities and digital commodities.

A Sep. 4 analysis identified ethics rules, protections for decentralized finance developers and stablecoin rewards as major disputes before the vote. Lawmakers also disagreed over provisions connected to President Donald Trump’s crypto interests.

Under the proposal’s four-part mature blockchain test, a network meeting its decentralization requirements could qualify as a digital commodity. Assets that failed the test would remain subject to securities laws, registration rules and SEC oversight.

The measure had already passed the House by 294-134 in July 2025, with 78 Democrats supporting it. It later cleared the Senate Banking Committee by 15-9 in May 2026, but securing 60 votes on the Senate floor required support from both parties.

Although the cloture motion failed, the bill has not automatically disappeared from the Senate. Lawmakers could return it to the calendar and schedule another vote if supporters secure enough commitments.

Coinbase and Bernstein expect agency action

Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong also said the vote should not stop U.S. regulators from developing clearer rules. While expressing disappointment with the result, he argued that the SEC and CFTC already possess tools that could be used under their present authority.

Armstrong said negotiations between Republicans and Democrats could continue, leaving open the possibility of another Senate vote. His comments did not establish when lawmakers might make a second attempt or what changes would be required to attract 60 votes.

Bernstein analysts offered a similar assessment in a note led by Gautam Chhugani. According to the firm, rulemaking by the SEC and CFTC could become “aggressive and swift” after months of congressional negotiations failed to produce a bill.

The analysts identified token classification, decentralized finance, self-custody and tokenized equities as areas where the agencies could act. Bernstein also expects regulators to address products tied to tokenized real-world assets, including perpetual futures based on such assets and individual stocks.

Agency rules would not have the same legal status as an act of Congress and could remain subject to court challenges or policy changes under future administrations. Armstrong and Bernstein, however, both expect regulators to continue using powers already granted by existing statutes.

Banking access remains central to Saylor’s forecast

Saylor’s prediction also depends on whether regulated banks choose to expand their digital-asset businesses. Custody requires banks to safeguard clients’ Bitcoin, while collateralized lending introduces credit, risk-management and repayment requirements.

For U.S. crypto companies, access to ordinary bank accounts and payment systems has long affected their ability to operate. A September review of U.S. banking access explained how Federal Reserve payment rails, master accounts and commercial banking relationships have shaped the services available to digital-asset firms.

The same review noted that 21 major banks, including Bank of America, Citi, Goldman Sachs, Deutsche Bank and UBS, had committed to a joint dollar stablecoin company targeting the first half of 2027. The planned venture would place traditional banks in direct competition with established issuers such as Circle and Tether.

Stablecoin regulation has progressed separately through the GENIUS Act. The law directs federal agencies to develop rules for payment stablecoin issuers, including requirements linked to licensing, reserves, and supervision.

Treasury proposed an implementing rule in April 2026, while the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency issued its own proposed GENIUS Act regulations in February. The OCC proposal covers payment stablecoin issuance and related activities carried out by institutions under the agency’s jurisdiction.

Industry executives have continued criticizing the CLARITY Act vote. Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse said politics had overtaken policy and called for a post-mortem on why the measure failed. He attributed the result to Democratic opposition, while negotiations had focused partly on demands for stronger ethics limits connected to Trump’s digital-asset interests.

U.S. lawmakers moved a step closer to turning President Donald Trump’s proposal for a strategic Bitcoin reserve into law after the American Reserve Modernization Act of 2026 (H.R. 8957) cleared the House Committee on Financial Services on Wednesday.

The committee approved the bill in a 28–21 vote, setting up the next phase of legislative review in the full House and, later, the Senate. If enacted, the measure would create a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve and a separate Digital Asset Stockpile inside the Department of the Treasury to hold federally forfeited Bitcoin and other digital assets.

Key takeaways

• The American Reserve Modernization Act of 2026 (H.R. 8957) advanced after a 28–21 vote in the House Financial Services Committee.
• It would establish a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve for Bitcoin held by the federal government for at least 20 years.
• The proposal aims to improve oversight via agency-wide asset accounting, quarterly “proof of reserve” reporting, and third-party audits.
• It would also commission a study on budget-neutral strategies for expanding the reserve and allow states to store their Bitcoin with the Federal Reserve.
• The bill explicitly affirms private Bitcoin ownership and the importance of self-custody and private key control.

From executive idea to draft legislation

The bill, introduced by Representative Nicholas Begich on May 21, is designed to address what supporters describe as fragmented and inconsistent custody practices for Bitcoin currently held under federal authority. Begich argued that allowing federal Bitcoin holdings to remain scattered across custody arrangements creates unacceptable cybersecurity risks and undermines accurate accounting of what the government actually owns.

In his view, the legislation would help make Bitcoin a durable part of U.S. reserve policy—while providing a clearer framework for how those assets are stored, reported, and secured.

What the bill would create at Treasury

According to the bill text described in coverage, H.R. 8957 would establish two related structures inside the Department of the Treasury:

• A Strategic Bitcoin Reserve for federally held Bitcoin; and
• A Digital Asset Stockpile for other digital assets acquired through criminal or civil forfeiture.

The proposal also sets a minimum holding period: Bitcoin placed in the federal reserve would have to remain there for at least 20 years. That requirement indicates the act is not being framed as a short-term treasury maneuver, but as a long-duration policy shift.

For investors and market participants, the key point is less about immediate market effects and more about the administrative pathway: if H.R. 8957 becomes law, it would standardize federal custody and governance around digital assets acquired through forfeiture—potentially reducing uncertainty about how such holdings are managed over time.

Transparency and audits built into the framework

The act would also require federal agencies to provide a comprehensive accounting of digital assets they currently hold or control. It further introduces transparency mechanisms that include:

• Quarterly “proof of reserve” reports; and
• Third-party audits.

Supporters appear to see these provisions as a direct response to custody and reporting gaps. By mandating recurring disclosures and independent verification, the bill attempts to make the reserve more measurable and harder to obscure through fragmented reporting.

Some context for why this matters: the U.S. government is estimated to hold 324,527 Bitcoin, worth $24.7 billion at the time of writing, according to Arkham Intelligence. While estimates can vary by methodology, the broad takeaway is that the federal government’s on-chain footprint is large enough that custody and reporting practices can become politically and operationally consequential.

Custody rules, self-custody rights, and what still needs to happen

Beyond reserve creation and transparency requirements, H.R. 8957 would direct a study of budget-neutral acquisition strategies for expanding the Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. The bill would also affirm that states could store their Bitcoin in the Federal Reserve.

Just as notably, the legislation would explicitly recognize private ownership and self-custody rights of Bitcoin, describing control of private keys as fundamental to “financial sovereignty, privacy, and personal liberty in the digital age.” That language is likely intended to address concerns that any federal Bitcoin framework could be interpreted as limiting individual control over assets.

Bitcoin Policy Institute executive director Connor Brown described the committee vote as a “genuinely historic step for Bitcoin policy,” while Strive CEO Matt Cole previously called the measure “the single most important crypto legislation that can come out of DC.”

However, the committee approval is only an intermediate milestone. The bill still has to pass the full U.S. House and then the Senate before it can reach President Trump for a final decision.

As lawmakers consider the next stages, readers should watch two things closely: whether the reserve and audit requirements survive amendments in the full House and Senate, and how negotiators balance federal reserve objectives with the bill’s explicit protections for private self-custody and key ownership.