Key takeaways:

• Strategy faces tighter short-term liquidity, but its conservative 11% net leverage protects it from forced BTC liquidations.
• A Bitcoin rally above $70,000 remains unlikely as long as STRC trades under $100 and spot ETFs show net selling pressure.

Bitcoin (BTC) faced a 21% price correction in 10 days, retesting the $61,000 level for the first time in 4 months. This movement coincided with Strategy (MSTR US) company’s decision to buy back some corporate debt, temporarily pausing its Bitcoin accumulation. Traders now fear that Strategy could be forced to liquidate some of its Bitcoin holdings.

Strategy (MSTR US) Bitcoin reserve changes & average price. Source: Strategy

Strategy had been the largest known Bitcoin buyer, accumulating 126,016 BTC for $9.31 billion since March. However, the company used $1.38 billion of cash raised by recent equity issuances to buy back some of its convertible debt. The decision, announced on May 15, coincided with the Stretch preferred stock (STRC US) distancing itself from $100.

Strategy Series A Perpetual Stretch preferred stock (STRC US). Source: TradingView

The STRC preferred stock allows Strategy to issue new shares whenever its price reaches $100 and offers holders a variable dividend, currently set at 11.5% annually, paid monthly in cash. If traders decide it is no longer worth $100, new buyers step in at lower levels, which is equivalent to demanding a higher dividend. So, at first sight, this should be a non-event for Strategy’s risk perception.

Strategy raised $7.5 billion through preferred stock issuances in the first 5 months of 2026, which was highly supportive of Bitcoin’s price. Now, the company faces a rough path, given its cash position has been reduced to $900 million, which is enough to cover dividends for 6 months.

Strategy (MSTR US) financial highlights. Source: Strategy

Strategy’s 11% net leverage is the key financial metric to monitor, as it represents the amount of debt the company holds relative to its assets. By any standard, the coverage provided by its Bitcoin holdings–even at a $30,000 price–should be considered conservative.

Will Strategy be forced to liquidate some of its Bitcoin holdings?

While short-term liquidity conditions have certainly deteriorated, there is no contractual floor set in Strategy’s convertible debt that would force a Bitcoin reserve liquidation. Moreover, there is no prohibition on selling MSTR stock at a discount to its market-adjusted net asset value.

If debt markets are not available, the company could opt to dilute current MSTR holders. Whether this move would be interpreted as a weakness and further pressure MSTR and STRC prices is irrelevant to Strategy’s leverage ratio, as the company would remain financially solid.

Related: Saylor downplays Bitcoin slide as Strategy faces $11B paper loss

Source: X/zeroxkyle

According to X user zeroxkyle, author of the “Grand Line” newsletter, an eventual Bitcoin sale from Strategy would only bring its price down faster, worsening liquidity conditions. The analysis refers to a “doom loop” causing buyers to withhold from adding positions due to a constant fear of a large seller entering the market.

It is impossible to predict what would ease investors’ tension, as Strategy is in no danger of an imminent forced sale. The preferred stock dividends can be paused at will, although they merely accumulate for later on. Still, as long as STRC continues to trade below $100 and spot exchange-traded funds (ETFs) remain a net seller, odds for a Bitcoin rally above $70,000 are slim.

According to Cointelegraph, Alexander Browder — the son of political activist Bill Browder — says Russia targeted him after he uncovered allegations that a ruble-pegged stablecoin, A7A5, was used to evade sanctions tied to Moscow’s war in Ukraine. Browder, speaking publicly via X, asserted that his reporting through the Global Cryptocurrency Laundering Database led to sanctions imposed by an authoritarian regime, framing the event as a direct consequence of exposing corruption in crypto flows.

Cointelegraph notes that A7A5 has drawn significant regulatory scrutiny due to its pegged value. A CertiK audit cited in coverage indicates the stablecoin processed more than $110 billion in on-chain transactions, underscoring the scale of activity associated with the asset. European Union officials sanctioned A7A5 in October 2025, claiming the token was designed to bypass war-related financial restrictions on Russia’s economy. The case illustrates the widening intersection of sanctions enforcement and digital-asset infrastructure, where tracing and enforcement capabilities increasingly collide with cross-border finance.

Key takeaways

• Alexander Browder alleges Russia sanctioned him for exposing the alleged use of the ruble-pegged stablecoin A7A5 to evade Western sanctions.
• A7A5 reportedly processed over $110 billion in on-chain transactions, highlighting substantial activity despite sanctions, with EU authorities sanctioning the token in 2025.
• Russian lawmakers moved to criminalize unlicensed crypto activities and require registration with the central bank, potentially banning unlicensed platforms starting July 2027.
• The episodes underscore regulatory and enforcement risks for exchanges, banks, and institutions that operate across borders in the crypto space, including AML/KYC considerations and licensing requirements.

Alexander Browder’s claims and the sanctions narrative

The central allegation centers on Russia’s response to Browder’s investigations into A7A5 and its purported links to illicit finance. Browder has described his work with the Global Cryptocurrency Laundering Database as the trigger for Russia’s actions, asserting that an authoritarian regime sanctioned him as retaliation for uncovering alleged crypto-enabled evasion. While such claims illuminate the personal dimension of crypto-policy battles, they also spotlight the broader legal question: how authorities respond when investigative reporting intersects with sanctions enforcement and digital-asset tracing.

Independent of Browder’s personal narrative, the status of A7A5 within sanction regimes has become a matter of international concern. Cointelegraph reported that the European Union sanctioned the ruble-pegged stablecoin in October 2025, characterizing the token as a vehicle to bypass the war-related financial restrictions imposed on Russia. The case feeds into ongoing debates about the vulnerability of digital-asset ecosystems to sanctions regimes and the effectiveness of on-chain tracing in identifying sanctioned flows.

A7A5’s on-chain footprint and the sanctions response

The on-chain footprint of A7A5, as summarized in CertiK’s findings cited by Cointelegraph, indicates substantial activity—well into the tens of billions of dollars in transaction value. This scale amplifies the practical challenges for enforcement agencies and financial intermediaries seeking to block or monitor sanctioned channels that leverage stablecoins and other crypto instruments. Browder’s broader assertion—that A7A5 remains operable despite sanctions—highlights the ongoing frictions between policy intent and technical feasibility in blocking cross-border crypto flows.

From a regulatory vantage point, the EU’s sanctions action against A7A5 signals a willingness to target the instrument itself alongside traditional financial conduits. For exchanges, custodians, and wallet providers, such actions translate into heightened due diligence, the need for robust sanctions screening, and potential risk that legitimate users may be inadvertently affected if screening is not precise. The episode also underscores the cross-border enforcement challenge: sanctions regimes increasingly rely on cooperation with platforms that operate beyond any single jurisdiction, including comprehensive AML and KYC controls in line with international standards.

Russia’s regulatory posture on digital assets and enforcement outlook

In a parallel regulatory arc, Russian lawmakers in the Duma advanced a bill intended to curb unlicensed digital-asset activities and to compel registration with the central bank. The proposed legislation, titled “On Digital Currency and Digital Rights,” would, if enacted, ban unlicensed crypto platforms beginning in July 2027 and impose criminal penalties for non-compliance. The move reflects Russia’s intent to formalize its oversight of crypto services while extending state control over licensing and supervision—an approach that aligns with broader global trends toward stricter crypto regulation and licensing regimes.

These developments occur in a wider regulatory environment where cross-border compliance demands and licensing obligations intersect with sanctions enforcement and AML/KYC frameworks. For institutions with operations or clients in Russia, or with exposure to Russian-origin flows, the evolving legal framework increases the importance of robust compliance programs, entity licensing checks, and ongoing monitoring of sanctioned counterparties. The Russian bill also highlights regulatory risk that could affect foreign exchanges and banks seeking to operate in or alongside Russian markets, given potential criminal penalties for unregistered activities and the central bank’s role in registration and oversight.

Regulatory and policy implications for institutions

Three dimensions stand out for compliance teams and institutional risk management at this juncture. First, sanctions enforcement around crypto assets, exemplified by A7A5, demonstrates the growing salience of digital instruments in geopolitical risk calculations. Exchanges and banks must maintain precise screening and sanctions-compliance capabilities to prevent value transfer through politically exposed or sanctioned channels, while preserving legitimate user access. Second, the Russian legislative push to criminalize unlicensed activity and to mandate central-bank registration signals a tightening of license requirements and supervisory expectations for digital-asset services. Firms with international exposure must assess licensing pathways, governance controls, and cross-border incident response plans under a shifting regulatory backdrop. Third, the developments illuminate cross-jurisdictional policy gaps and the need for harmonized standards in AML/KYC, transaction-monitoring, and end-to-end traceability for stablecoins and other digital assets that span multiple legal regimes.

In the European context, the A7A5 case complements ongoing regulatory narratives around stablecoins, licensing, and cross-border supervision. While MiCA (Markets in Crypto-Assets Regulation) is a principal EU framework that shapes the licensing and supervision of crypto-asset services, the A7A5 sanctions episode provides a concrete illustration of how regulators may apply such frameworks to stabilize financial ecosystems and deter evasion strategies. For banks and payment-service providers, the case underscores the necessity of robust controls for cross-border settlement rails and the integration of crypto-asset risk management into traditional banking compliance programs.

Closing perspective

The Browder-A7A5 narrative sits at the intersection of investigative journalism, sanctions policy, and digital-asset regulation. As authorities pursue tighter oversight of crypto activity and more assertive enforcement actions, institutions operating in or with Russia, the EU, and allied jurisdictions should monitor licensing developments, sanctions enforcement patterns, and the evolving governance of digital currencies. The next phase will reveal how rapidly these policies translate into concrete licensing outcomes, enforcement actions, and practical workflows for compliance teams navigating a reconfigured cross-border digital economy.

Key Takeaways

• Republican senators demand equitable capital requirements for cryptocurrency banking activities
• Lummis spearheads GOP effort demanding transparent crypto banking capital frameworks
• Lawmakers oppose Basel Committee’s stringent 1,250% risk weighting for digital assets
• Republican coalition demands technology-agnostic regulatory approach for crypto
• Senate GOP intensifies scrutiny of banking agencies’ cryptocurrency capital frameworks

A group of Republican senators has called on federal banking authorities to establish equitable capital requirements for cryptocurrency-related banking operations. The legislators argue existing frameworks impose prohibitive capital burdens on financial institutions. This regulatory challenge emerges alongside congressional deliberations on comprehensive digital asset legislation.

Republican Lawmakers Oppose Basel’s Cryptocurrency Framework

Senator Cynthia Lummis spearheaded an initiative involving five fellow Republican senators, directing correspondence to key U.S. financial regulatory officials. The communication targeted Federal Reserve Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman, FDIC Chair Travis Hill, and Comptroller Jonathan Gould. These regulatory bodies now confront mounting demands to reassess capital frameworks governing cryptocurrency exposures.

The legislative group condemned Basel Committee regulations imposing a 1,250% risk weighting on certain digital assets. They contended the benchmark categorizes the entire sector as excessively hazardous without appropriate risk assessment. Their position maintains the regulatory structure effectively functions as a prohibition mechanism.

The Basel Committee establishes international banking standards governing capital adequacy and regulatory oversight. Participating entities comprise central banking institutions and regulatory bodies from leading global economies, encompassing the United States. Nevertheless, the senators advocated for American regulators to implement an approach that remains neutral toward underlying technology.

Senate Coalition Demands Regulatory Clarity for Digital Assets

The letter urges regulatory agencies to expand upon recent directives regarding tokenized securities. During March, the Fed, FDIC, and OCC announced tokenized securities would typically receive capital treatment equivalent to conventional securities. The senators maintained regulators should extend this principle throughout additional digital asset operations.

The lawmakers contended financial institutions require definitive regulatory frameworks before expanding cryptocurrency services on their balance sheets. They emphasized banks should maintain capital reserves proportionate to genuine risk factors rather than facing blanket restrictions. Furthermore, they asserted balanced standards would facilitate legitimate participation within digital asset marketplaces.

The correspondence arrives as congressional bodies examine expansive cryptocurrency legislation. Such legislation might authorize banks to conduct expanded balance-sheet cryptocurrency operations. Consequently, the senators stressed agencies must establish capital guidance before financial institutions gain enhanced regulatory permissions.

Legislative Pressure Mounts for Cryptocurrency Market Participation

The correspondence received endorsement from Senators Dan Sullivan, Bill Hagerty, Bernie Moreno, Ted Budd, and Jon Husted. Their collective statement positions cryptocurrency capital requirements within an expansive policy discourse. It simultaneously represents escalating Republican pressure on regulatory agencies to facilitate banking sector involvement.

The senators maintained capital frameworks should account for both risk factors and market potential. They additionally argued regulations should not obstruct banks from providing supervised cryptocurrency services. Their position suggests antiquated standards might drive commercial activity beyond regulated banking infrastructure.

The disagreement now enters a more comprehensive regulatory context. Bowman, Hill, and Gould are scheduled to testify before the House Financial Services Committee on Thursday. Their testimony could influence how regulatory agencies approach cryptocurrency capital treatment throughout upcoming months.

Reza Bundy, chief executive of Atlas Capital and business partner of longtime bitcoin critic Nouriel Roubini, expects bitcoin to fall as much as 70% over the next six months before eventually climbing as high as $500,000 in the years ahead.

Speaking to CoinDesk at the Proof of Talk conference in Paris, Reza Bundy, CEO of investment advisory firm Atlas Capital, issued his grim macroeconomic warning that runs contrary to typical industry optimism.

“We think there’s going to be a massive drawdown in bitcoin in the next six months,” Bundy said, echoing Roubini’s long-held thesis. “It [drawdown] could be up to 70%. We think $26,000 to $30,000 was the number we came up with. If there’s a drawdown in the stock market that’s even half of what happened in 2008, Bitcoin will double that debt loss.”

Bitcoin BTC$63,485.45 was trading around $63,000, down nearly 28% this year, while the equity markets have rallied sharply on the back of AI hype and momentum chasing. The S&P 500 rose 10%, and the Nasdaq climbed about 19%, outpacing bitcoin over the same period.

‘Dr. Doom’

Bundy said that his bearish forecast is built directly on data and analysis developed alongside his Chief Economist, and Co-founder, Dr. Nouriel Roubini, known as “Dr. Doom” for accurately predicting the 2008 subprime mortgage crisis.

Roubini is also an anti-bitcoin advocate whose skepticism of bitcoin stretches back to the historic 2017 bull run. While bitcoin rose roughly 850% from its level when Roubini first called it a bubble, Dr. Doom has maintained his bearish stance on the digital asset.

In recent market assessments published on Bloomberg, Roubini reiterated his conviction that bitcoin is a “pseudo-asset class” and a pure “speculative asset” that lacks fundamental value or real-world utility, making it distinct from real economic hedges like gold.

Bundy has somewhat echoed that doom-and-gloom prediction for bitcoin, at least in the short term. He claimed that bitcoin has failed as an inflation hedge, as many bulls have said, and is now just a highly volatile risk asset moving in lockstep with tech stocks.

While bitcoin advocates are likely to dispute that characterization, pointing to the asset’s long-term returns and fixed supply, Bundy’s criticism echoes comments made by billionaire investor Mark Cuban, who recently said he sold most of his bitcoin after it had failed to behave like a hedge during periods of geopolitical stress and dollar weakness.

Bitcoin’s original promise

On the flip side, Bundy isn’t a perma-bear on bitcoin.

He still believes in bitcoin’s ‘store of value’ thesis and is bullish in the long term. Bundy’s longer-term prediction is a price range of $150,000 to $500,000, which puts him at odds with his Atlas partner, Roubini.

His optimism dates back to bitcoin’s original promise as an alternative currency that counters global political and monetary chaos. Bundy argued that bitcoin’s long-term growth will be driven by rising government debt, central bank arbitrary money printing and dropping trust in traditional currencies (as Satoshi Nakamoto originally envisioned).

And Bundy has reasons for his bullishness. He mapped out bitcoin’s longer-term price using four economic paths:

• First, under “Controlled Expansion” (40% chance), the world sees steady growth and stable inflation. This keeps markets moving up and pushes bitcoin to a range of $150,000 to $250,000.
• Second, if “Fiscal Dominance” prevails (25% chance), governments will print money to cover their massive debts, leading to high inflation. This environment favors scarce assets, driving bitcoin between $250,000 and $500,000.
• Third, a “Global Conflict” path (20% chance) involves major security shocks in places like Taiwan or the Middle East. This would trigger a quick market panic and initial price drops, but would ultimately prove bitcoin’s value as a safe, neutral asset.
• Fourth, a “Deflationary Recession” (15% chance) means a harsh credit freeze that leaves bitcoin weak until central banks step in to pump liquidity back into the system.

‘Techno-dollar’ shift

In the short term, though, Bundy continues to see a global financial crisis on the horizon. He warns that the traditional stock market is a bubble waiting to pop like 1929, and this thesis also informs Atlas Capital’s investment strategy, called the “techno-dollar,” Bundy said.

Instead of pegging digital tokens to a single depreciating government currency, he claimed that the strategy uses AI-driven allocation models to shift exposure among assets, including gold, food, real estate and defense technology. Atlas currently runs this asset allocation strategy through a traditional ETF vehicle with ticker “USAF” on the Nasdaq. The fund currently has about $18 million in net assets, and returned 8.7% since inception, according to TradingView data. Bundy also plans to tokenize it on public blockchains later this month.

When asked why bitcoin isn’t part of the fund, even though he is bullish on the long term, Bundy said he is waiting for the short-term market crash he predicted to pass first.

“We believe there will be a major stock market correction, and we don’t want to be part of the bitcoin drawdown. Once the correction happens, we will make our final decision to include or not.”

The cryptocurrency market currently demonstrates an intricate balance between sudden rallies and prolonged consolidation phases. Retail buyers and institutional funds are actively shifting capital toward assets offering clear utility and definitive structures. With inflation indices showing persistent stiffness, traditional investment avenues yield lower relative returns, pushing participants to search for alternative digital networks.

Market sentiment reflects cautious optimism, driven by advancements in smart contract capabilities, enhanced privacy protocols, and interoperability solutions. As global liquidity tightens, finding sustainable value requires looking beyond surface-level hype. Investors are rigorously evaluating utility-driven frameworks and established networks that consistently deliver tangible financial benefits to determine the top crypto to buy.

1. BlockDAG: The Pure Mathematical Multiplier (The Direct Arbitrage)

When discussing the next big crypto, pure math often overrides mere speculation. A direct entry price of $0.00000044 against a guaranteed $0.001 buyback creates an unprecedented mathematical arbitrage. The ledger does not lie. BlockDAG has opened its Legacy Sale at an incredibly low floor price of $0.00000044 per token.

By immediately registering these assets for the official Buyback Program through the platform dashboard, participants lock in a contract to sell those exact coins back to the project at a fixed rate of $0.001 per token. This clear mathematical loop completely detaches the asset from standard market sentiment. Those wondering what crypto to invest in will find immense value in this setup. This specific low entry allocation is strictly capped.

Once the initial token batch is claimed, the massive price gap vanishes. Secure the $0.00000044 price floor before the direct arbitrage window closes permanently. BlockDAG is positioning itself as the next crypto to explode by offering a structured exit plan. It stands out clearly as the best crypto to buy right now for buyers who prefer calculated returns over unpredictable price action.

2. Chainlink: Securing Real-World Asset Tokenization

Chainlink continues to establish its dominance across the decentralized finance sector. In early 2026, the network facilitated a major transition by bringing an $11 billion Arizona copper mine on-chain. This milestone underscores the growing demand for secure real-world asset tokenization. The Cross-Chain Interoperability Protocol now handles vast amounts of institutional data. Leading financial entities utilize Chainlink to verify reserves and execute complex smart contracts seamlessly.

As a result, Chainlink frequently appears among the top crypto gainers during periods of high institutional activity. Its robust infrastructure prevents data tampering and ensures smooth multi-chain connectivity. Buyers tracking solid long-term utility view Chainlink as a critical component for the future digital economy.

3. Toncoin: Expanding the Telegram Ecosystem

Toncoin has experienced a highly active 2026, driven by its deep integration with the Telegram messaging application. The network recently saw a massive surge when Telegram announced it would officially become the largest validator for the network. This structural shift drastically reduced transaction fees and activated new core upgrades. Furthermore, the introduction of ad revenue sharing directly in Toncoin has empowered channel owners globally.

Despite facing high volatility and heavy whale movements, the supply of USDT on the Toncoin network crossed $500 million, proving its growing utility as a global payment rail. Toncoin remains a highly watched asset for users seeking scalable social media integrations.

4. Cronos: Enhancing Layer-1 Scalability

Cronos has maintained steady development throughout 2026, focusing on enhancing its layer-1 capabilities. Supported by the extensive Crypto.com ecosystem, the network offers seamless transitions between centralized finance and decentralized applications. Developers are actively deploying new tools to improve transaction throughput and reduce latency. The platform recently introduced significant upgrades to support complex gaming and decentralized finance protocols.

By maintaining a highly interoperable framework, Cronos allows users to bridge assets across multiple networks efficiently. Its dedicated community and consistent technical improvements provide a solid foundation for future growth. Investors value Cronos for its reliable performance and strong backing within the broader digital asset exchange environment.

Last Say

Evaluating the current market requires a strict focus on utility and clear financial structures. Chainlink leads the way in institutional data verification and asset tokenization. Toncoin leverages its massive social media base to create a unique peer-to-peer payment ecosystem. Cronos provides a reliable layer-1 solution backed by major exchange infrastructure.

However, BlockDAG offers a fundamentally different approach. By providing a fixed $0.00000044 entry price and a guaranteed $0.001 buyback contract, it removes the typical volatility associated with digital assets. Participants seeking calculated returns should prioritize BlockDAG before the limited allocation completely disappears.

Disclaimer: This is a Press Release provided by a third party who is responsible for the content. Please conduct your own research before taking any action based on the content.

The crypto firm tied to President Donald Trump, World Liberty Financial Inc., was again a focus of political scrutiny in a congressional hearing in which the chief of the U.S. Office of the Comptroller of the Currency suggested the only political pressure his agency feels on its decision of whether or not to give the firm a bank charter comes from Democrats, not Trump.

Comptroller of the Currency Jonathan Gould’s rebuttal had come in response to Representative Gregory Meeks, a New York Democrat, who asked during the Thursday hearing whether Gould is “working for the American people or working as a Trump fixer, which is it?”

“Your attempts to continue to pressure me are the only political pressure I’ve felt from anyone other than your Senate colleagues,” Gould said, referring to similar questions he’d heard from Democrats including Senator Elizabeth Warren. “That is very unfortunate and unprecedented,” he added, insisting that his agency will do its job under the statute governing charters.

Democrats continue to argue that World Liberty’s connection to foreign investors and crypto partners that have been previously associated with illicit behavior — including global exchange Binance — suggest that it’s not fit for a U.S. banking charter, and they’ve argued it’s inappropriate for a Trump appointee to be deciding whether to give such a benefit to a business partially owned by the president and his family.

Amid Thursday’s verbal sparring, Gould said his agency is following ethics laws in the application for a national trust-bank charter for World Liberty Trust Company.

The Trump-tied business is also a stablecoin issuer, which was a central topic of the hearing of the House Financial Services Committee, at which the U.S. supervisors of the banking and credit union industries explained where they’re at on implementing the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act.

The regulators have already issued several proposed rules to put the new law into place, and Federal Deposit Insurance Corp. Chairman Travis Hill said another is coming soon, saying his agency and others will propose a rule requiring “customer identification programs” for stablecoin issuers “in the very near future.”

Kyle Hauptman, chairman of the National Credit Union Administration, touted the U.S. rise of stablecoins in his testimony.

“As stablecoins are more widely adopted, we Americans may no longer be made fun of for speaking about how many ‘business days’ a payment will take to settle. Every day is a business day with stablecoins,” he said. “Tax refunds may eventually arrive on Sundays or holidays. And if we ever have a repeat of the COVID outbreak in March 2020, Americans should be able to receive emergency stimulus funds in a more timely and secure manner.”

But Representative Brad Sherman, a California Democrat who routinely speaks against the risks of crypto, said, “I can’t think of a worse idea” than allowing government payments in stablecoins. “It would sanctify an alternative to the U.S. dollar, an alternative designed to facilitate a tax-evasion economy.”

Sherman also argued that the GENIUS Act “requires that there be no interest paid on stablecoins,” and he contended that “the smartest, or at least the best-paid lawyers in the country” are trying to figure out ways to evade that prohibition, so the regulators need to “write regulations that withstand that.”

Also at the hearing, a lawmaker asked Federal Reserve Vice Chair for Supervision Michelle Bowman about the Fed master account granted to crypto exchange Kraken.

Bowman said the approval granted only “very limited access to the payments system” and for an initially narrow duration of 12 months, during which she said the Fed will be watching it closely to educate itself in preparation for formal rules for providing such accounts. The rest of the crypto industry is also keenly interested in the outcome of the Fed’s policy work on opening such access to the central bank’s payments system and services, commonly known as “skinny” master accounts.

Read More: U.S. Senator Warren rebuffed on delay of World Liberty bank charter over Trump ties