For the first time, the United States housing system is preparing to count your Bitcoin as a real asset when you apply for a mortgage, without making you sell it first. 

The shift traces to a directive from Federal Housing Finance Agency Director William Pulte, who ordered Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, the government-sponsored enterprises that guarantee the majority of America’s roughly 51 million mortgages, to prepare proposals for treating cryptocurrency as an asset in single-family mortgage risk assessments. 

The key phrase is “without conversion to U.S. dollars.” Until now, a borrower with a hundred thousand dollars in Bitcoin had to liquidate it, triggering a taxable event and surrendering future upside, before a lender would count a cent of it. Under the new framework moving through implementation in 2026, verified crypto holdings could strengthen a mortgage application while the borrower keeps the coins. It has been called a revolutionary moment that could change homeownership forever. 

It is also narrower, more conditional, and more complicated than the headlines suggest. This piece explains what the order actually does, how it would work in practice, the catches that matter, and what it really means for crypto holders who want to buy a home.

What the order actually says

Start with the precise language, because the details define both the promise and the limits.

The directive came from William Pulte, Director of the Federal Housing Finance Agency, the regulator that oversees Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac and that also installed Pulte as chairman of both companies’ boards. The order instructs each enterprise to “prepare a proposal for consideration of cryptocurrency as an asset for reserves in their respective single-family mortgage loan risk assessments, without conversion of said cryptocurrency to U.S. dollars.” Pulte framed it in explicitly political terms, tying it to President Trump’s stated goal of making the United States “the crypto capital of the world,” and adding that he wanted “people who own cryptocurrency to be able to buy homes like everyone else.”

The significance starts with who Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac are. These two government-sponsored enterprises do not lend directly to homebuyers. Instead, they buy mortgages from the lenders who originate them, bundle those loans into securities, and guarantee payments to investors, which provides the liquidity that keeps the mortgage market functioning. Because they guarantee the majority of U.S. mortgages, their underwriting rules effectively set the standard for what the entire conventional mortgage market will accept. When Fannie and Freddie change what counts as a qualifying asset, lenders across the country follow, because loans have to conform to GSE guidelines to be sold to them. So a change at this level is not a niche product tweak. It is a change to the rules of the largest mortgage market on earth.

The order marks the first formal step toward integrating digital assets into the GSEs’ underwriting frameworks. That framing, “first formal step,” is important and easy to lose in the excitement. This is a directive to prepare proposals, the opening move in a process, not a finished, live mortgage product on day one. By 2026 that process has advanced from the initial order into implementation, with the enterprises drafting guidelines and some lenders beginning to experiment, but it is an evolving framework rather than a switch that flipped overnight.

What actually changed: the “no conversion” breakthrough

To understand why this matters, you have to understand the old rule it replaces, because the entire significance is in one specific change.

Under the pre-existing guidelines, cryptocurrency was effectively invisible to mortgage underwriting unless it stopped being cryptocurrency. Fannie Mae’s selling guide required that any virtual currency a borrower wanted to use for qualifying, whether for the down payment, closing costs, or asset reserves, had to be liquidated into U.S. dollars first. The dollars then had to be “sourced and seasoned,” meaning documented as sitting in a bank account for a period of time, before they counted. In practical terms, your Bitcoin counted for nothing to a mortgage application until you sold it and parked the proceeds in a bank.

That requirement carried real costs that went beyond inconvenience. Selling crypto to qualify for a mortgage triggers a taxable event, potentially generating capital gains taxes on appreciated holdings. It forces the holder to surrender any future upside on assets they believed in enough to accumulate. And it exposes them to timing risk, having to sell at whatever the market price happens to be when they apply. For a crypto holder, the old rule said, in effect: you can use this wealth to buy a home, but only by giving up being a crypto holder.

The new framework changes exactly this. Under the directive, verified crypto holdings can be counted as reserves without conversion to dollars. The borrower keeps the coins, avoids the taxable sale, retains the upside, and still gets credit for the assets in the underwriting calculation. This is the breakthrough, and it is meaningful: it recognizes cryptocurrency as a legitimate store of wealth that can sit on a borrower’s financial statement the way stocks, bonds, and retirement accounts do, rather than treating it as something that has to be cashed out to be real. For someone whose net worth is substantially in Bitcoin or Ethereum, that is the difference between their wealth helping them qualify and being invisible.

How it would actually work

The mechanics matter, because the order does not make crypto equivalent to cash, and the conditions attached shape who actually benefits.

The most important practical point is the role crypto plays. The directive is about counting cryptocurrency as reserves, the financial cushion lenders want to see proving a borrower can keep paying the mortgage if their income is interrupted. This is distinct from using crypto directly for the down payment or closing costs, which still generally requires actual dollars that have to be sourced and seasoned. So the realistic near-term picture is not “pay for your house in Bitcoin.” It is “your Bitcoin holdings strengthen your financial profile and reserve position, helping you qualify, while you still need dollars for the actual cash to close.” That is a real benefit, especially for self-employed or crypto-wealthy borrowers whose assets are strong but whose documented income or liquid cash might otherwise fall short, but it is narrower than the headline implies.

Three conditions attach to which crypto counts. First, only assets on regulated exchanges qualify: the crypto must be evidenced and stored on a U.S.-regulated centralized exchange subject to applicable laws, so holdings on platforms like Coinbase count while other arrangements may not. Second, risk-based adjustments apply: because crypto is volatile, the GSEs are directed to apply additional risk mitigation, which in practice means haircuts. Where stocks might get a modest discount to account for market swings, crypto could face a much larger buffer, so a hundred thousand dollars in Bitcoin might be counted as only sixty or seventy thousand in reserves. Third, limits on the share of reserves: the proposals are directed to limit the portion of total reserves that can be composed of cryptocurrency, so a borrower cannot rely on crypto alone.

The honest framing, as some mortgage analysts have noted, is that even in the best case crypto is unlikely to be treated more favorably than stocks and bonds, and probably a bit less favorably given the volatility haircuts. It will not be easier than the treatment of traditional securities, and that makes sense, because it would be strange to give a volatile asset better treatment than a stable one. The realistic outcome is that crypto becomes a recognized but discounted asset class in underwriting, counted with wider guardrails than traditional holdings, which is still a major step up from being counted at zero.

The self-custody controversy

The condition that crypto must sit on a regulated exchange has provoked the sharpest criticism, and it exposes a genuine philosophical tension at the heart of the order.

The requirement is that eligible crypto be stored on a U.S.-regulated centralized exchange. The logic is verification: regulators and lenders want to be able to confirm the borrower actually owns the assets, and holdings on a regulated, KYC-compliant exchange are easy to verify through statements and account records. From an underwriting standpoint, that is a reasonable instinct. Lenders need documentary proof of assets, and a regulated exchange provides a familiar paper trail.

But it cuts against one of cryptocurrency’s foundational principles, and self-custody advocates have pushed back hard. Nick Neuman, CEO of the self-custody provider Casa, called the exchange requirement a mistake, arguing that self-custody is fundamentally about property rights, which are a core American value. His technical point is that the verification concern is solvable without forcing custody onto exchanges: thanks to cryptography, it is trivial to prove that assets held in self-custody are owned by a given individual, through cryptographic signatures that demonstrate control of the wallet without surrendering it. In other words, the order assumes that only exchange-held assets can be verified, when in fact self-custodied assets can be verified too, just by a different method that the framework does not yet accommodate.

The criticism matters beyond ideology, because a large share of serious, long-term crypto holders deliberately self-custody precisely to avoid exchange risk, the lesson hammered home by years of exchange failures. The exchange-only requirement therefore excludes exactly the cohort most committed to crypto as a long-term store of wealth, the people most likely to have substantial holdings they have held for years. It is a meaningful gap, and the hope among advocates is that the framework evolves to recognize cryptographic proof of self-custodied holdings, allowing the housing system to be forward-thinking enough to accommodate how committed holders actually store their assets. For now, though, the rule rewards keeping your crypto on an exchange, which sits in tension with the security practices the crypto community spent years promoting.

What it really means for crypto holders

Pulling it together, the order is significant, but its significance is best understood by separating what it does from what the headlines imply.

What it does, concretely: it establishes for the first time that the U.S. conventional mortgage system will recognize cryptocurrency as a legitimate asset class in underwriting, counted without forcing a sale. For a crypto holder applying for a mortgage, that means holdings on a regulated exchange can strengthen the reserve position and overall financial profile, improving the odds of qualifying, without the tax hit and lost upside of liquidating. For borrowers whose wealth is concentrated in crypto, which includes many in the industry, that removes a real barrier that previously made their assets invisible to lenders. It is a legitimization milestone, crypto taking a seat at the table alongside stocks and bonds in one of the most conservative corners of American finance.

What it does not do: it does not let you buy a house with Bitcoin in the literal sense, it does not treat crypto as favorably as cash or even as favorably as stocks, it does not count self-custodied holdings, and it did not happen all at once. The realistic version is that crypto becomes a recognized but heavily caveated asset for reserves, subject to volatility haircuts, exchange-custody requirements, and limits on what share of reserves it can comprise. The transformation is real but incremental, an opening of the door rather than a wide-open entrance.

The broader meaning is the most durable point. This is part of a wider 2026 trend of cryptocurrency being woven into the traditional U.S. financial system, alongside the spot ETFs, the advancing regulatory frameworks, and the growing institutional infrastructure. Having the entities that guarantee over half of U.S. mortgages prepare to count crypto as an asset is a profound signal of legitimization, regardless of how narrow the initial mechanics are. It says the housing system, perhaps the most important wealth-building institution in American life, now considers cryptocurrency a form of wealth worth recognizing. For a holder, the practical advice is to temper the excitement with the details: keep records, understand that exchange custody is currently required, expect volatility haircuts, and recognize that crypto will strengthen an application rather than replace the need for documented income and actual dollars to close. The door is opening. It is just opening at the measured pace that the most conservative part of the financial system always moves, and that it is opening at all is the real story.

This article is for informational purposes and does not constitute financial, investment, tax, or mortgage advice. Cryptocurrency markets are highly volatile and mortgage rules vary by lender and circumstance. The figures and analysis described reflect data available as of June 2026. Always do your own research and consult with qualified financial and mortgage professionals before making decisions.

HTX has delisted USD1, the stablecoin issued by Trump-linked World Liberty Financial, after the exchange said WLFI froze certain on-chain addresses linked to the platform.

The exchange, associated with crypto entrepreneur Justin Sun, said the freeze limited the movement of assets tied to those addresses. HTX said it removed USD1 to protect user assets and reduce trading risk.

HTX removes USD1 after wallet freeze

HTX said World Liberty Financial “unilaterally imposed a freeze” on specific HTX on-chain addresses following sanctions compliance checks.

The exchange said the action restricted circulation of some WLFI-linked assets. It also said the freeze came without enough prior communication, clear legal basis, or due process.

HTX has suspended USD1 deposits and conversion services. It also halted trading for WLFI/USDT, USD1/USDT, BTC/USD1, and ETH/USD1 pairs.

The exchange said eligible USD1 balances will be converted into Tether’s USDT at a 1:1 rate. HTX said more details on timing will be shared separately.

World Liberty cites sanctions controls

World Liberty Financial has not publicly confirmed whether it froze HTX-linked addresses.

The project posted on X that “in light of recent sanctions updates, World Liberty Financial maintains risk-based sanctions compliance controls.”

The dispute follows UK sanctions announced on May 26 against Huobi Global S.A., formerly linked to the HTX brand. UK authorities said they had grounds to suspect the entity supported Russia through financial services.

HTX rejected the link to its current online exchange. It said Huobi Global S.A. is separate from the operating HTX platform and should not affect users.

Justin Sun dispute adds pressure

The USD1 delisting adds another layer to the public fight between Justin Sun and World Liberty Financial.

As previously reported by crypto.news, Sun and World Liberty have been locked in a legal dispute after WLFI froze Sun’s tokens. Sun sued the project in April, claiming his assets were frozen and threatened without proper reason.

World Liberty later sued Sun for defamation. The project claimed he made false statements and broke WLFI token sale rules through alleged transfers, short-selling, and straw purchases.

Sun has been linked to HTX and has served on its global advisory board. The exchange has said it may seek legal remedies to protect user rights.

USD1 faces fresh trust test

USD1’s removal from HTX comes at a difficult time for stablecoin issuers and crypto exchanges. The case shows how compliance actions can quickly affect token access, trading pairs, and user balances.

The stablecoin had gained attention because of its link to World Liberty Financial, a project tied to U.S. President Donald Trump and his family. Donald Trump, Donald Trump Jr., Eric Trump, and Barron Trump are listed as advisers.

HTX said its main goal is to protect users while asking WLFI to reverse the freeze. For now, USD1 trading on HTX remains suspended, and users must wait for the exchange’s conversion update.

Bitcoin BTC$62,899.28 pulled back from Sunday highs as renewed military conflict between Iran and Israel sent Asian stocks, including South Korea’s Kospi index, sharply lower.

The leading cryptocurrency by market value traded at around $62,900 at 4:00 UTC, having hit a high of $63,776 late Sunday, according to data source CoinDesk.

WTI crude oil futures jumped over 3% to $93.50 as Iran and Israel traded airstrikes, ending the recent fragile ceasefire that had calmed energy markets. U.S. President Donald Trump called for restraint and said he has requested Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu “not to retaliate”.

“I am going to call Bibi right now and tell him not to retaliate,” he told Axios in a telephonic interview. “Israel had its strike and Iran had its strike. We don’t need another one.”

Still, Asian equity markets took a beating, with South Korea’s KOSPI falling over 6.8%, prompting a temporary trade halt amid volatile conditions. Japan’s Nikkei index also fell over 3%.

The latest spike in oil prices could only add to the upward momentum in the U.S. Treasury yields, which surged Friday following the release of the blowout monthly U.S. jobs report. Hardening of Treasury yields typically boosts demand for the dollar and dollar equivalents and weighs over riskier assets like cryptocurrencies.

Bitcoin has already taken a beating for several reasons, including Strategy’s BTC sale, the AI stock frenzy, and the exodus of capital from spot bitcoin ETFs. Prices fell nearly 14% last week, briefly penetrating the $60,000 mark.

Volatility could remain high this week as geopolitical tensions, coupled with key data releases such as U.S. inflation and major IPOs like SpaceX and Anthropic, are likely to influence liquidity dynamics.

HTX, the crypto exchange linked to crypto entrepreneur Justin Sun, delisted the Trump family’s USD1 stablecoin after claiming World Liberty Financial wrongly froze the exchange’s addresses.

“The World Liberty Financial (WLFI) project team recently stated that it has unilaterally imposed a freeze on specific HTX on-chain addresses based on sanctions compliance reviews,” said HTX on Saturday.

“As a result, the on-chain circulation of certain WLFI assets associated with these addresses has been restricted,” it said, adding it delisted USD1 to safeguard user assets. 

Last month, the UK sanctioned HTX, formerly called Huobi Global, on May 26, claiming there were “reasonable grounds to suspect” the exchange had supported Russia’s government through financial services.

However, HTX said the sanctioned entity, Huobi Global S.A., is “distinct from the online HTX exchange” and that such a designation should not impact the platform.

Source: HTX

The delisting took effect on Sunday. Deposit and conversion services for USD1 are no longer supported, and users’ USD1 holdings would be converted to the stablecoin Tether (USDt) at a 1:1 ratio, with exact completion times and details to be announced separately.

It has also suspended WLFI/USDT, USD1/USDT, BTC/USD1 and ETH/USD1 trading pairs. 

The exchange said its addresses were frozen “without sufficient prior communication, adequate contractual or legal grounds, transparent disclosure or adherence to due process” and that the move infringed the rights of its users and their assets, and has called WLFI to reverse the freeze.

HTX said it will also take measures to “safeguard users’ legitimate rights and interests, including but not limited to pursuing legal remedies.”

World Liberty, which counts US President Donald Trump and his three sons, Donald Jr., Eric and Barron as advisers, has not publicly addressed whether it froze HTX’s addresses.

It posted on X on Wednesday that “in light of recent sanctions updates, World Liberty Financial maintains risk-based sanctions compliance controls.”

Cointelegraph contacted World Liberty Financial for comment.

Related: Trump claims he can ‘future proof’ crypto regulation with CLARITY Act

Sun, who reportedly owns HTX and serves on the exchange’s global advisory board, sued World Liberty in April, claiming the platform froze his tokens and threatened to burn them “without any proper justification.”

In May, World Liberty sued Sun for defamation, claiming he made false statements about the platform and violated WLFI token sale terms through alleged prohibited transfers, short-selling and straw purchases.

Magazine: Quitting Trump’s top crypto job wasn’t easy: Bo Hines

Strategy, the bitcoin treasury vehicle led by executive chairman Michael Saylor, signaled additional activity in its BTC holdings on Sunday as it nears a pivotal STRC dividend vote. Saylor posted on X a bubble chart tracking Strategy’s Bitcoin purchases over nearly six years, hinting that “a good time to add more dots.” The post came ahead of a shareholder meeting where investors will decide whether STRC dividends shift from a monthly cadence to semi-monthly payouts.

CEO Phong Le amplified the message, noting that Strategy’s objective is to increase net Bitcoin and Bitcoin per share over time, and that rumors should be treated cautiously until the vote concludes.

Strategy continues to hold a sizable Bitcoin treasury—843,706 BTC with an average cost of about $75,701 per BTC. Bitcoin itself traded around $62,153 at the time of writing, after a roughly 16.6% decline over the past week, according to CoinMarketCap data.

Last week, Strategy announced it had repurchased some corporate debt, temporarily pausing further BTC accumulation and stirring market fears that financing buybacks could require selling BTC.

Key takeaways

• A signal of renewed BTC purchases from Saylor ahead of STRC news, continuing a pattern of public cues ahead of Strategy’s acquisitions.
• The proposed STRC dividend change would move to semi-monthly payments; passage hinges on 50% of all 85 million STRC shares outstanding as of April 17, 2026.
• BTC’s recent price action has been negative, with Strategy’s 843,706 BTC holding carrying an implied cost basis around $75,701 per coin.
• Debt repurchase last week paused BTC accumulation and raises questions about liquidity and future capital allocation plans.
• Retail investor proxy voting participation remains historically low relative to institutions, potentially shaping the outcome of the proposal.

Strategic signals behind the vote and the BTC thesis

Michael Saylor’s public signaling has become part of Strategy’s cadence ahead of material BTC moves. The executive chairman’s social posts, often accompanied by data visualizations from StrategyTracker, historically precede the company’s latest crypto purchases and help frame market expectations around Strategy’s ever-expanding bitcoin pool. Strategy remains one of the most prominent publicly traded holders of Bitcoin, with a reported 843,706 BTC on its balance sheet and an average acquisition cost near $75,701 per BTC. In the current price environment, Bitcoin traded around $62,153, illustrating the gap between the cost basis of Strategy’s holdings and prevailing market prices.

The context matters for investors evaluating the potential impact of further acquisitions on Strategy’s per-share Bitcoin exposure and on the liquidity characteristics of STRC—an issue that has gained additional attention as the company navigates a broader sell-off in crypto markets.

Dividend cadence change: voting mechanics and what’s at stake

The key decision for Strategy shareholders is a proposed adjustment to STRC dividend payments, shifting from a monthly to a semi-monthly schedule. The company argues that more frequent distributions would reduce reinvestment lag, improve liquidity and market efficiency, and contribute to greater price stability. The amendment requires the support of 50% of all STRC shares outstanding, which stood at 85 million as of April 17, 2026, meaning roughly 42.5 million votes would be needed for passage.

The outcome is expected to be determined at Monday’s Strategy shareholder meeting. Cointelegraph requested turnout data from proxy solicitor Alliance Advisors, but did not receive an immediate response. As a practical matter, retail participation in proxy voting has historically lagged institutional engagement; a Harvard Law School Forum on Corporate Governance note from November highlighted that retail holders vote on about 29% of their shares, compared with roughly 77% for institutional holders.

What changes if the measure passes and what to watch next

Proponents contend that semi-monthly distributions would bolster liquidity, shorten reinvestment lags, and theoretically enhance the Sharpe ratio by providing more entry and exit points for investors. Strategy leadership has framed the change as part of a disciplined, time-scaled approach to increasing bitcoin exposure over time while maintaining stability for STRC holders. The company suggested that the new cadence would begin in June, with the first semi-monthly payout expected in July, a detail referenced by Saylor at the Synergy26 conference for registered investment advisors.

Beyond the vote, investors will be watching for any new BTC purchases or other capital allocation moves that could influence Strategy’s cost basis and the dynamic between its bitcoin treasury and STRC’s market performance. The latest signals from Saylor and StrategyTracker emphasize that corporate actions remain intertwined with the company’s long-running strategy of expanding bitcoin ownership while navigating the implications of debt management and liquidity planning.

As the voting process unfolds, readers should keep an eye on turnout figures and any updates on Strategy’s Bitcoin accumulation plans, which could have material implications for both STRC holders and the broader narrative around publicly traded Bitcoin treasury vehicles.

TLDR:

• Morpho Midnight lets lenders and borrowers lock in fixed rates and maturity dates, replacing floating-rate pool models 
• All markets sharing the same end date pool liquidity together, preventing fragmentation across separate isolated loan contracts 
• Lender capital stays productive on Morpho Blue while simultaneously backing fixed-rate offers on Midnight in one transaction 
• Settlement fees are permanently capped at 50 bps per year, with lender fees hardcoded at a maximum of 1% annually

Morpho Midnight is a new fixed-rate lending protocol built by the team behind Morpho Blue. The whitepaper proposes a fundamentally different approach to onchain credit.

Instead of floating rates tied to pool utilization, borrowers and lenders agree on fixed rates and set end dates upfront.

With over $25 billion in onchain loans today, the protocol targets institutions seeking predictable borrowing costs.

Morpho Midnight Introduces Fixed-Rate Lending to DeFi

Morpho Midnight operates through tradeable units that function as fixed-income instruments with a maturity date. Each unit represents a claim on a future payout, settled at a predetermined rate.

A lender paying $0.95 today, for instance, receives $1.00 at maturity six months later. The difference between entry price and redemption value defines the fixed interest rate.

All markets sharing the same end date are combined into a single liquidity pool. This design prevents liquidity from fragmenting across separate, isolated loan contracts.

As analyst Stacy Muur noted, “liquidity builds up instead of splitting across a thousand separate loans.” The pooling mechanism directly addresses a structural weakness in prior fixed-rate DeFi experiments.

Borrowers and lenders do not interact through a traditional orderbook. Lenders post cryptographically signed offers without locking capital onchain.

Borrowers locate these offers off-protocol, through Telegram, frontends, or routing systems, then submit them for settlement. The protocol itself handles only the final settlement step, keeping execution lean.

This design keeps lender capital productive at all times. A lender can keep funds deployed in Morpho Blue while simultaneously quoting fixed-rate offers on Midnight.

When a borrower accepts, capital moves and the trade settles in a single transaction. The idle capital problem that undermined earlier fixed-rate protocols is structurally removed.

Capital Efficiency and Liquidation Mechanics Set Morpho Midnight Apart

One pool of capital can back offers across multiple markets simultaneously. A market maker with $10 million, for example, can quote across dozens of markets without allocating separate funds to each.

Total exposure stays capped at the actual balance held. This mirrors how traditional fixed-income market makers operate across bond maturities.

Liquidation rules in Morpho Midnight are also more precise than standard DeFi norms. A minor collateral breach triggers a partial repayment rather than a full position liquidation.

Bad debt, if it occurs, is recognized immediately rather than socialized across the pool over time. Borrowers who miss repayment deadlines receive a 15-minute grace ramp before penalties apply.

Fee structures are permanently capped within the protocol. The settlement fee cannot exceed 50 basis points per year, and the lender fee is capped at 1% annually.

These limits are hardcoded and cannot be raised by governance or any other mechanism. Institutional participants gain a reliable, unchanging cost structure.

Morpho’s broader thesis is that onchain credit markets should eventually resemble traditional fixed-income markets.

Floating-rate pools suited early DeFi, but growing market size now demands more structured instruments. Morpho Midnight is designed to meet that demand directly.