Connect with us

Crypto World

Crypto’s banker adversaries didn’t want to deal in latest White House meeting on bill

Published

on

Crypto's banker adversaries didn't want to deal in latest White House meeting on bill

Crypto industry negotiators arrived at the White House on Tuesday ready to talk about a legislative deal on stablecoin yields, but their banking counterparts brought further demands for a ban on such rewards in the Senate’s crypto market structure bill, according to people familiar with the talks.

The fight over whether stablecoins should be able to offer rewards — a lobbying battle between Wall Street bankers and crypto insiders — is one of the chief headwinds keeping the Senate Banking Committee from advancing the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act. It’s now been a sticking point for months, and the banking side held their ground on prohibiting the rewards activity and more, according to a principles document circulated by the bank negotiators, despite the White House’s insistence last week that both sides come with ideas for compromising.

The document called for a general prohibition on stablecoin yield, according to a copy obtained by CoinDesk, suggesting a ban on “any form of financial or non-financial consideration to a payment stablecoin holder in connection with the payment stablecoin holder’s purchase, use, ownership, possession, custody, holding or retention of a payment stablecoin.”

The crypto team at the table was said to include executives from Coinbase, Ripple, a16z, the Crypto Council for Innovation and the Blockchain Association, according to people familiar with the plans. The White House sought to pare down the numbers of participants in the most recent gathering there last week, which hadn’t produced significant progress on the question of stablecoin rewards programs that are a key component of crypto platforms’ business models.

Advertisement

Despite the lack of significant progress, crypto representatives struck a hopeful note in statements about the meeting.

“We’re encouraged by the progress being made as stakeholders remains constructively engaged on resolving outstanding issues,” said Blockchain Association CEO Summer Mersinger, who was said to participate in the meeting.

“The important work continues,” said Ji Kim, the CEO of CCI, in a statement after the meeting, saying his group “appreciates the banking industry for their continued engagement.”

Banking groups involved in the meeting, including the Bank Policy Institute and American Bankers Association, issued a statement after the meeting, though it included no details about next steps on the legislation.

Advertisement

“As we noted during the meeting, that framework can and must embrace financial innovation without undermining safety and soundness, and without putting the bank deposits that fuel local lending and drive economic activity at risk,” the group said in the combined statement.

The document they were said to have shared insisted that stablecoin activity “must not drive deposit flight that would undercut Main Street lending.” It asked that the requested ban come with an enforcement stick for regulators, and the document suggested a study by regulators that examines the effect of stablecoin activity on deposits.

After two White House meetings on the topic and no significant movement of the line on yields, the matter may return to the discretion of lawmakers working on the bill.

Before the Senate can approve a bill, the banking panel needs to clear it through a majority vote. The legislation already has its necessary backing from the Senate Agriculture Committee, and a similar bill with the same name won a vote in the House of Representatives last year. But bankers have raised their concerns about the threat to deposits at the core of their industry.

Advertisement

However, stablecoin yield isn’t the only major sticking point. Senate Democratic negotiators have demanded that the effort include a ban on deep crypto involvement from senior government officials, driven primarily by President Donald Trump’s personal crypto interests. The Democratic lawmakers have also insisted on greater protections against crypto’s use in illicit finance and also that the Commodity Futures Trading Commission get fully staffed by commissioners — including Democratic appointees — before it can get to work on crypto regulations.

While Trump’s crypto adviser, Patrick Witt, has predicted the negotiators will find common ground soon, he also told CoinDesk that the White House won’t support an effort that targets the president. Witt was said to lead the meeting on Tuesday, as he did the one last week.

The Clarity Act faces a number of practical challenges beyond the policy disputes, including the Senate’s ongoing friction over a last remaining budget issue: the funding of the Department of Homeland Security, which runs Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE). The Senate is always a tough place to secure necessary floor time to move legislation, and the closer the chamber gets to the lengthy breaks before the midterm elections this year, the more difficult it is to find enough time to handle a major crypto bill.

Read More: Crypto industry, banks not yet close to stablecoin yield deal at White House meeting

Advertisement

UPDATE (February 10, 2025, 23:16 UTC): Adds comment from the bank lobbying groups.

UPDATE (February 10, 2025, 00:12 UTC): Adds details about the bankers’ document stating their principles on yield.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Crypto World

DeFi Insurance Is The Final Frontier Of Onchain Finance

Published

on

DeFi Insurance Is The Final Frontier Of Onchain Finance

Opinion by: Jesus Rodriguez, co-founder of Sentora

If you look at decentralized finance (DeFi) as a stack of computational primitives, it’s remarkably complete — yet fundamentally broken.

We have automated market makers for liquidity, like Uniswap. We have lending markets for capital efficiency, and bridges for cross-chain “packet switching.” Step back and look at the architecture from a systems engineering perspective.

There is a gaping hole where the risk backstop should be.

Advertisement

Insurance is the “missing primitive” of the decentralized web. It is the translation layer that turns scary, opaque technical risk into a legible line item — a number you can compare, hedge and budget for. Without it, we aren’t building a financial system; we’re building a very sophisticated, high-stakes casino.

Insurance hasn’t worked, so far

A lot of chatter has been spent on why onchain insurance hasn’t “mooned” despite billions in total value locked (TVL). Personally, I suspect the failure is structural, not just a “lack of interest.” We’ve been fighting against the physics of risk management.

Most first-generation protocols tried to use DeFi-native assets, like Ether (ETH) or protocol tokens, to insure the very same DeFi stack those assets live in. This is a classic “reflexivity” trap. When a major exploit happens, the entire ecosystem usually suffers a setback. The collateral loses value at the exact moment the payout is triggered. In systems terms, this is a positive feedback loop of failure. It’s like trying to insure a house against fire using a bucket of gasoline. To work, insurance requires uncorrelated capital: assets that don’t care if a specific smart contract gets drained.

Historically, we relied on retail yield farmers to provide “cover.” These users don’t wake up caring about actuarial tables or underwriting. They care about APY and points. This is not the stable, long-term underwriting base that is required to build a multibillion-dollar risk engine. Real insurance requires a “low cost of capital” base — institutional-grade assets that are happy to sit and collect a steady 2%-4% spread without needing to “degenerate” into 100% APY schemes.

Advertisement

The scaling imperative

We’ve spent years obsessing over TVL as the North Star of DeFi. TVL is a vanity metric; it tells you how much capital is sitting in the “danger zone.” The metric we actually need to optimize for — the one that actually measures the maturity of the industry — is total value covered (TVC).

If we have $100 billion in TVL but only $500 million in TVC, the system is effectively 99.5% “naked.” In any traditional engineering discipline, this would be considered a catastrophic failure in safety margins. You wouldn’t fly in a plane that was 0.5% “safety tested.”

The scaling imperative for the next era of DeFi is to bridge this gap. We need a path where TVC scales linearly with TVL. Currently, they are decoupled. TVL grows exponentially based on speculation, while TVC crawls linearly because the “risk markets” are illiquid and manually managed. Scaling DeFi isn’t just about Layer 2 throughput; it’s about “risk throughput.”

Pricing the ghost in the machine

We often talk about risk as an ethereal, spooky thing that happens to other people. In a mature financial system, risk is a commodity. It needs to be assetized.

Advertisement

Think of DeFi insurance as the pricing engine of risk. Currently, when you deposit into a vault, you are consuming a bundle of risks: smart contract risk, oracle risk and economic design risk. These risks are currently unpriced — they are just hidden baggage you carry.

By building a robust insurance primitive, we turn those hidden risks into tradable assets. We move from “I hope this doesn’t break” to “The market says the probability of this breaking is exactly 0.8% per annum, and here is the tokenized instrument that pays out if it does.”

Related: AI will forever change smart contract audits

This assetization is powerful because it creates a market signal. If the cost of cover for Protocol A is 5% while Protocol B is 1%, the market has effectively “priced” the security of the code. Insurance isn’t just a safety net; it’s the global oracle for protocol health. It turns “security” from a vague marketing claim into a hard, liquid price.

Advertisement

The dream of programmable insurance

The “end state” of this technology isn’t just a decentralized version of Geico — it’s a transition from legal insurance to computational insurance.

Think about the difference between a traditional legal contract and a smart contract. Traditional insurance involves 40-page PDFs, adjusters and a six-month claims process. It is a “human-in-the-loop” bottleneck.

Programmable insurance is a primitive that can be integrated directly into the transaction stack. It includes granular cover and atomic payouts. You don’t just “insure a protocol” in the abstract. You insure a specific LP position, a specific oracle feed, or even a single high-value transaction. If the state of the blockchain detects an exploit, the payout happens in the same block. There is no “claims department”; there is only “state verification.”

This makes insurance a “first-class citizen” in the code. You can imagine an “Insurance” button on every swap or deposit, much like how you choose “priority gas” today. It becomes a toggle in the UI.

Advertisement

The next wave of DeFi adoption

The real challenge for DeFi adoption isn’t convincing another 1,000 degens to use a bridge; it’s onboarding the fintechs and neobanks.

These entities are already knocking on the door. They are considering the 5% onchain risk-free rates and comparing them to their legacy rails, which are clogged with overheads and rent-seekers. However, for a neobank (think of firms such as Revolut, Chime or Nubank), “The code is the law” is not a valid risk management strategy. Their regulators — and their own risk committees — simply won’t allow it.

For these players, insurance isn’t a “nice to have”; it’s a hard requirement for deployment. They represent the next “trillion-dollar” wave of liquidity, but they are currently standing on the sidelines. They need a “wrapper” that makes DeFi look like a bank account.

If we can provide a robust, programmatically backed insurance layer, we aren’t just protecting degens; we are providing the “regulatory-compliant shield” that allows a neobank to put $1 billion of customer deposits into a lending vault. Insurance is the bridge between “crypto-native” and “global finance.”

Advertisement

We’ve spent the last few years building the “engine” of the new financial system. We have the pistons (liquidity), the transmission (bridges) and the fuel (capital). But we forgot the brakes and the air bags.

Until we solve the insurance primitive, DeFi will remain a niche experiment for the risk tolerant. By shifting our focus from TVL to TVC, moving toward uncorrelated collateral and embracing the “pricing engine” of assetized risk, we can finally turn this experiment into a resilient, global utility.

Strap in. There is a lot of code to write and even more risk to underwrite.

Opinion by: Jesus Rodriguez, co-founder of Sentora.

Advertisement