Advantages over Tesla?

Humanoid questions

Circle has agreed to acquire Singapore-based cross-border payments platform Tazapay in a $400 million all-stock deal expected to close in 2027, the companies announced. The acquisition is structured as a Class A common stock purchase, with the final price subject to adjustments tied to Tazapay’s debt, transaction expenses, and cash levels, according to a filing with the US Securities and Exchange Commission.

The transaction will also depend on customary closing conditions and approval from the Monetary Authority of Singapore, Circle said in its Tuesday announcement. Circle previously invested in Tazapay through Circle Ventures, including during the startup’s August 2025 Series B round.

Key takeaways

• Circle is buying Tazapay for $400 million in an all-stock transaction expected to close in 2027.
• The SEC filing says the deal price will be adjusted for Tazapay’s debt, transaction expenses, and cash.
• Tazapay reports more than $25 billion in annualized payment volume and services over 60 banking and fintech partners.
• Circle says stablecoins make up about 60% of Tazapay’s transaction volume, supporting its cross-border routing ambitions.
• Circle says Tazapay customers should not see disruption to services, APIs, pricing, or support.

A $400 million all-stock acquisition aimed at faster global rails

Under the agreed terms, Circle will pay for Tazapay using Class A common stock. The SEC filing also states the purchase price is not fixed: it will be adjusted based on Tazapay’s debt, transaction expenses, and cash at closing.

Circle said the deal would require regulatory and procedural steps before completion, including approvals from the Monetary Authority of Singapore and other standard closing conditions. The company did not indicate any expected earlier-than-2027 timeline in the announcement.

Tazapay’s scale in Asia-Pacific and emerging markets

Tazapay positions itself as an infrastructure provider for cross-border payments, with a focus on local payout rails across many destinations. According to information Circle shared, Tazapay has more than $25 billion in annualized payment volume and serves more than 60 banking and fintech partners.

In August 2025, Tazapay told Newswire that its annualized payment volume was more than $10 billion, suggesting meaningful growth over time as the company expanded its network and partner footprint. The company also said it supports payout rails covering more than 100 markets.

Tracxn data cited in the coverage indicates Tazapay has raised $57.9 million across five funding rounds. Circle’s involvement through Circle Ventures included participation in the August 2025 Series B round, linking the corporate strategy behind the investment to the later acquisition.

Stablecoin-linked volume and the push for 24/7 routing

Stablecoins account for about 60% of Tazapay’s transaction volume, according to Circle. That share matters for Circle’s stated direction: the company is working to integrate stablecoin-based payment rails into mainstream cross-border flows.

Circle said the acquisition will expand its ability to route payments to and from Asia-Pacific and emerging markets. In comments attached to the announcement, Circle’s Irfan Ganchi, senior vice president of payments, described the goal of increasing Circle’s capability to originate and terminate payments globally “near-instant and 24/7” and said the effort is a step toward making USDC the default payment rail for cross-border commerce.

Tazapay has also been described as a design partner for the Circle Payments Network since 2025. Circle said that role, plus Tazapay’s existing infrastructure, is central to how it plans to scale routing capabilities after the acquisition.

What remains unchanged for customers and partners

Circle said Tazapay customers should see no disruption to their services, APIs, pricing, or support. For users and developers building on payment infrastructure, this kind of continuity promise is often as important as the acquisition headline—because it affects integration stability and operational risk during a transition period.

While the companies did not outline a post-close roadmap in the details provided, the focus on uninterrupted customer experience suggests the integration approach will be managed to avoid breaking changes. Circle’s statement also implicitly indicates that the product and developer-facing interfaces are expected to remain stable until closing, which is still set for 2027.

In the market, Circle’s NYSE-traded shares were down more than 2% in Tuesday’s premarket activity, according to Yahoo Finance, at last look. The move reflects how investors often react to larger corporate actions even when timelines extend into the future.

Why the deal matters for cross-border payments

The acquisition highlights a broader competitive theme in stablecoin-enabled finance: infrastructure providers are looking to secure distribution and routing where payment speeds and availability are crucial. By bringing Tazapay’s network—along with its reported stablecoin-heavy flow mix—into its own stack, Circle is effectively positioning itself to compete in the middle layer between banks, fintech apps, and on-chain settlement.

It also matters that the transaction is all-stock and subject to adjustments. For shareholders, the structure adds exposure to equity valuation and closing conditions; for Tazapay, the deal preserves involvement in a larger payments ecosystem rather than a purely cash exit. Circle’s requirement for Monetary Authority of Singapore approval underscores that cross-border payment infrastructure can carry regulatory weight even when stablecoins are a key component of the operating model.

As the deal works through approvals and closing conditions, readers should watch for additional detail on integration plans for the Circle Payments Network and how Circle intends to maintain continuity for Tazapay’s partners. The key uncertainty remains the timeline and the final share-based purchase price mechanics once the debt, expense, and cash adjustments are locked in ahead of the 2027 close.

Authorities in Mexico have arrested two suspects accused of killing four people in a home invasion they allegedly carried out in search of a Bitcoin “cold wallet” believed to contain millions of dollars, according to La Jornada and an update from the Attorney General’s Office of the State of Mexico (FGJEM).

The alleged incident centers on Jonathan Meléndez, a keyboardist for the rock band Camilo Séptimo, along with his pregnant wife, their daughter, and a household employee in Atizapán de Zaragoza. Mexico’s FGJEM said the suspects may face lengthy prison terms if convicted, while investigators reportedly claim one suspect gained access to the residence through a personal connection.

Key takeaways

• Mexican prosecutors accuse two men of targeting a Bitcoin cold wallet during a multi-victim homicide in Atizapán de Zaragoza, La Jornada reported.
• Both suspects are scheduled for a hearing on Wednesday, where a judge will decide whether the evidence is sufficient to move forward with criminal proceedings.
• FGJEM said the suspects could face 25 to 70 years in prison per homicide victim if convicted, as reported by La Jornada.
• Officials reportedly alleged at least one suspect had a business relationship with one of the victims and used it to enter the home.
• Broader security reporting continues to show wrench-style attacks—coercing victims to access or hand over crypto—rising across 2026’s first half.

Arrests tied to alleged hunt for a Bitcoin cold wallet

La Jornada, citing an update from FGJEM, said two suspects—identified only as Diego Sebastián and Gerardo, with their surnames withheld—were arrested in connection with the killing of four people.

The case is now moving toward a judicial stage: Diario de México reported that the suspects are scheduled for a court hearing on Wednesday, during which a judge will determine whether there is enough evidence to sustain ongoing criminal proceedings.

FGJEM announced the arrests in an X post on Sept. 2. La Jornada also reported that prosecutors believe the men pursued a cold wallet they thought held millions of dollars in Bitcoin. Mexico’s security secretary, Omar García Harfuch, said in a Sept. 2 X post that one suspect used a relationship with a victim to get into the home.

Allegations around the victims and the alleged method of entry

According to La Jornada, prosecutors accuse the two suspects of killing Jonathan Meléndez, his pregnant wife, his daughter, and an employee during the attack at their residence in Atizapán de Zaragoza. The report also says the family’s golden retriever was killed.

The allegation about access is important for how the case could be framed in court. García Harfuch stated that one suspect was a business associate of one of the victims and allegedly leveraged that connection to enter the home, a claim that can matter for establishing planning, intent, and the suspects’ ability to reach the target location.

Potential sentences and what the next court step determines

La Jornada reported that FGJEM said the suspects could face 25 to 70 years in prison per homicide victim if convicted. While the precise charges and ultimate sentencing outcomes would depend on the court’s determination, the range underscores the gravity of the alleged crimes and the prosecution’s posture.

For investors and crypto users, this case also illustrates how physical coercion can become intertwined with cryptocurrency ownership. Unlike typical theft cases, wrench attacks depend on immediate access—often through forcing victims to unlock wallets, reveal credentials, or hand over control.

Why “wrench attacks” remain a growing crypto risk

The Mexico case aligns with broader security reporting on coercive “wrench attacks,” where criminals use violence or threats to compel victims to hand over cryptocurrency or provide access to wallets.

Blockchain security firm CertiK reported that in the first half of 2026 there were 20 publicly reported home invasions targeting crypto holders, compared with just a single incident in the same period a year earlier. CertiK also put the total number of wrench attacks worldwide at 52 in H1 2026, up 33.3% from 39 during H1 2025.

Chainalysis estimates that criminals stole more than $30 million in crypto through wrench attacks in the first half of 2026.

The overall increase is not limited to 2026. CertiK previously reported that wrench attacks rose in 2025, with 72 verified cases worldwide—up from 39 in the prior year, described as a 75% increase in earlier reporting. The same security reporting noted that France recorded the most attacks in 2025 with 19 confirmed incidents, and that Europe accounted for about 40% of attacks globally that year.

Separate reporting also highlighted the lethal stakes of such crimes: Russian outlet Fontanka reported that in October 2025 attackers killed convicted Russian crypto fraudster Roman Novak and his wife after kidnapping them and demanding access to crypto wallets.

What to watch as the Mexico case moves forward

With a Wednesday hearing scheduled to assess whether the evidence supports continued prosecution, the key developments to monitor are what prosecutors can substantiate about the alleged cold-wallet target and the suspects’ entry into the home—particularly the claimed relationship used to gain access. Separately, the rising global pattern of wrench attacks in 2025 and the first half of 2026 suggests crypto holders should keep security planning focused on physical coercion risks, not only on digital threats.

Strategy, the largest corporate holder of Bitcoin, did not add to its BTC treasury during its most recent reporting window. Instead, it used part of its financing machinery to repurchase shares of its preferred stock vehicle, STRC, signaling a shift toward capital structure management rather than fresh Bitcoin accumulation.

According to a Tuesday filing with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, Strategy repurchased $176.3 million worth of STRC preferred shares—about 1.8 million shares—between Aug. 31 and Sept. 7. Over the same period, Strategy also increased the size of its Digital Credit Securities Repurchase Program to $2 billion. With no new Bitcoin purchases during this stretch, its treasury holdings were listed at 845,050 BTC, acquired for $63.6 billion at an average cost of $75,412 per coin.

Key takeaways

• Strategy paused Bitcoin purchases in the Aug. 31–Sept. 7 window while deploying capital to repurchase preferred stock via STRC.
• The company repurchased $176.3 million of STRC shares and raised its Digital Credit Securities Repurchase Program to $2 billion.
• Strategy’s BTC treasury remains unchanged at 845,050 BTC in the filing, with an average acquisition price of $75,412.
• STRC trading below its $100 par value can reduce Strategy’s ability to raise funds through STRC sales and may pressure dividend economics.
• Other corporate buyers—including Strive and Capital B—continued to add Bitcoin while Strategy stepped back.

Preferred-stock repurchases replace new BTC buying

Strategy’s latest SEC filing centers on STRC. The company reported that it repurchased 1.8 million STRC shares for an aggregate $176.3 million during Aug. 31 to Sept. 7, using the same preferred-stock structure that has become central to its broader Bitcoin strategy.

That pause matters for traders and investors because it highlights the operational choices behind BTC treasury growth. Even for the sector’s most prominent buyer, Bitcoin accumulation is not constant; it can be influenced by financing conditions, payout planning, and the mechanics of how Strategy converts capital markets activity into additional BTC exposure.

The filing also notes an expansion of Strategy’s Digital Credit Securities Repurchase Program to $2 billion. Repurchase programs can be used to manage outstanding securities and expected cash flows, but the practical implication for BTC holders is that not all incoming capital is being directed to new BTC purchases at any given moment.

What the SEC numbers imply for Strategy’s BTC treasury

With no new Bitcoin purchases disclosed for this interval, Strategy’s treasury remains at 845,050 BTC. The company attributes that position to $63.6 billion in total acquisition cost, equating to an average purchase price of $75,412 per BTC.

Investors often watch the timing of these disclosures closely because they help distinguish between periods of direct accumulation and periods dominated by corporate actions. In this case, the company’s reported BTC count stays flat, while capital markets activity is reflected through preferred-stock buybacks.

Strategy’s most recent prior large purchase was reported earlier in the year by Cointelegraph—its first BTC buy since mid-June, consisting of a $370 million acquisition. The contrast between that purchase period and the subsequent pause underscores that Strategy’s approach can move between “buy” and “structure” modes rather than progressing in a single uninterrupted line.

STRC trading below par raises questions about dividend funding

The filing comes alongside market pricing signals for STRC. In premarket activity on Tuesday, STRC was reported trading around $97.70—roughly 2.3% below its intended $100 par value. At the same time, Strategy’s Nasdaq-traded MSTR common stock was reported down more than 3% in Yahoo Finance’s last look.

That matters because STRC is not only a balance-sheet instrument; it’s also a funding tool. The article notes that STRC is one of Strategy’s main vehicles used to finance Bitcoin accumulation. If STRC trades below par, it can limit how much Strategy may raise through future STRC sales, potentially affecting the pace at which it can convert equity-like instruments into additional BTC exposure.

Lower pricing versus par can also complicate dividend expectations. The piece indicates that trading below par may “force the company to further increase its dividend rate,” connecting market pricing directly to payout needs. Strategy’s dividend framework is part of a broader plan: on June 29, the company unveiled a capital framework intended to allow Bitcoin sales to fund dividends, and it increased the annual dividend rate on its STRC preferred stock to 12%—a key detail for readers tracking how Strategy balances BTC exposure against shareholder returns.

While Strategy paused, other treasuries kept buying

Strategy’s decision not to purchase Bitcoin during this window coincides with continued accumulation by other corporate holders.

Strive, described as the fifth-largest corporate Bitcoin treasury, added 1,375 Bitcoin for $109 million, according to CEO Matt Cole’s disclosure on Monday. That purchase reportedly brought Strive’s total holdings to 24,531 BTC, with an average cost of $79,281 per Bitcoin. Ahead of Tuesday’s market open, Strive’s Nasdaq-traded ASST shares were reported down more than 2.5%, following a more than doubling in the prior month.

In France, Capital B also reported a purchase: it disclosed a $25 million Bitcoin acquisition on Monday—its largest in nearly a year—taking its holdings up to 3,521 BTC. The report also says that this move pushed Capital B ahead of H100 Group among publicly traded BTC holders.

These developments matter because corporate Bitcoin competition is increasingly about timing and financing. When Strategy pauses, it can leave space for other treasury operators to gain relative market position and momentum—both in absolute BTC holdings and in investor attention.

For readers, the next signal to watch is whether Strategy returns to BTC purchases immediately after this window, or whether it continues to prioritize repurchases and dividend mechanics through STRC and the expanded $2 billion Digital Credit Securities Repurchase Program.

Abraxas Capital has bought another 13,000 ETH worth $32.39 million in the spot market to hedge part of a 141,180 ETH short position on Hyperliquid valued at $353.27 million.

Lookonchain said on Sept. 8 that Abraxas Capital purchased the additional Ether while keeping its much larger short position open on the decentralized derivatives platform. The blockchain analytics account described the transaction as another spot purchase made specifically to hedge the short.

Sweden’s tax authority has ordered six crypto companies operating in Boden to pay nearly 540 million Swedish kronor (approx. $56 million) in additional taxes after finding that the firms used business structures to obtain tax benefits they were not entitled to.

Swedish public broadcaster SVT reported on Sept. 3 that the six companies accounted for most of the latest tax adjustments imposed on crypto businesses following a review by Skatteverket, the Swedish Tax Agency. The authority said some companies had structured their operations in ways that concealed crypto mining activity.

Patrik Lillqvist, head of intelligence at Skatteverket, said the arrangements were designed to secure tax advantages that would not have been available if the businesses had been classified as crypto miners.

“The companies that we have inspected often have a special arrangement to conceal that they are engaged in mining,” Lillqvist said, according to a translation of his remarks. “The purpose is to obtain tax advantages that the companies are not entitled to.”

The latest assessments form part of the agency’s review of the crypto industry between 2024 and 2026. Nine companies have received tax adjustments totaling more than half a billion Swedish kronor during that period, with six of them operating in Boden.

Sweden crypto tax review centers on mining operations

Boden, a city in northern Sweden, has attracted crypto miners for years because of its access to power and data center infrastructure. The region was already home to around 10 crypto mining companies by 2018, when operators were increasingly looking to Sweden as a location for mining facilities.

Tax treatment later became a source of tension between the industry and Swedish authorities. Sweden moved in 2023 to remove electricity tax relief previously available to data centers, a decision that affected Bitcoin miners operating energy-intensive facilities in the country.

The latest Skatteverket cases concern how companies described the nature of their businesses for tax purposes. According to the agency, some firms presented operations in a way that hid their role in creating new units of cryptocurrencies through mining.

SVT’s earlier investigation into Sweden’s crypto industry found in 2024 that companies had deprived the state of around 1 billion Swedish kronor in taxes, with most of the cases concentrated in Boden. The new assessments show that disputes involving the sector continued through 2026.

Lillqvist criticized companies that entered Swedish communities and used arrangements that the authority believes deprived the state of tax revenue.

“You come to a society and steal from it,” he said.

Several companies have challenged Skatteverket’s decisions in court. Sweden’s administrative court and administrative court of appeal have so far sided with the tax authority in the cases they have considered, according to SVT.

Bikupan Datacenter takes dispute to Sweden’s top administrative court

Bikupan Datacenter, which has operated in Boden and Robertsfors, is among the companies contesting the tax authority’s position.

The company has been granted corporate restructuring after becoming unable to pay its debts, while its tax dispute has reached Sweden’s Supreme Administrative Court. The case remains under consideration.

Bikupan is connected to HIVE Digital Technologies, whose Swedish operations have been caught in a longer-running disagreement over the tax treatment of its business. HIVE said in March that it was scaling down Bitcoin mining at its Boden facility as it challenged the way Swedish tax rules were being applied to the operation.

Johanna Törnblad, CEO of Bikupan Datacenter and HIVE’s Sweden country manager, rejected Skatteverket’s assessment of the company’s historical operations.

“When it comes to the historical operations of the Bikupa companies, we do not share the Swedish Tax Agency’s assessment,” Törnblad told SVT by email.

She said Bikupan’s restructuring application explains the company’s position that crypto mining itself was performed by external mining pools that were independent of the HIVE group.

Under the company’s account of its business model, the Bikupa entities sold computing capacity, or computing power, which could be used for workloads including artificial intelligence.

HIVE has been moving its Boden site toward AI computing

The distinction has become more relevant to HIVE’s plans for its Swedish infrastructure as the company moves resources toward high-performance computing and artificial intelligence.

Crypto.news previously reported in June that HIVE generated record fiscal 2026 revenue of $298 million while expanding its AI computing business. Its high-performance computing operation generated $19.5 million during the fiscal year, up 94% from $10 million a year earlier, while contracted annual recurring revenue from its BUZZ HPC unit reached $35 million.

HIVE reported 440 megawatts of global power capacity across Canada, Sweden and Paraguay at the end of the fiscal year. Its installed Bitcoin mining hashrate increased from 6.5 exahashes per second to 25.1 EH/s during the same period, although the company’s Bitcoin holdings fell to 150 BTC as of March 31.

Part of its AI expansion has involved repurposing infrastructure that was originally used for crypto mining. The company has been converting its Boden facility into a Tier 3 liquid-cooled high-performance computing data center designed to support 2,000 Nvidia GPUs.

The company had already disclosed plans in November 2025 to retrofit the Boden site from a Tier I mining facility into a liquid-cooled Tier III+ high-performance computing center, while expanding GPU infrastructure in Canada.

HIVE’s dispute with Swedish authorities has continued while Bikupan deals with its tax liabilities and restructuring proceedings. The company maintains that its historical Swedish entities provided computing power while independent external mining pools carried out the actual crypto mining.

Skatteverket has maintained the opposite position in its assessments, treating the reviewed operations as mining activity and arguing that the structures used by the companies gave them tax advantages for which they did not qualify. Bikupan’s challenge to that assessment remains before the Supreme Administrative Court.