Congressional scrutiny has intensified around World Liberty Financial (WLFI) after Senate Democrats raised concerns about a major foreign-linked investment. The lawmakers are seeking additional information about a reported transaction involving entities connected to the United Arab Emirates. Meanwhile, the issue has emerged alongside ongoing debates over digital asset legislation in Washington.

Senate Democrats Seek Review of WLFI UAE Investment

Five Democratic senators have urged Republican committee leaders to examine a reported investment involving WLFI. The lawmakers requested a congressional hearing and highlighted potential conflicts linked to foreign interests. As a result, the issue has drawn fresh attention to the company’s ownership structure.

According to the senators, the investment agreement was completed shortly before Donald Trump returned to office. They stated that a UAE-linked partner received a 49% stake in WLFI through the arrangement. Additionally, the lawmakers reported that foreign buyers paid $218 million to entities connected to Trump and envoy Steve Witkoff.

The senators identified Sheikh Tahnoon bin Zayed Al Nahyan as the lead investor in the transaction. They argued that the reported ownership structure raises questions about foreign influence. Consequently, they requested sworn statements from administration officials and others connected to the deal.

The lawmakers also pointed to policy developments that occurred after Trump took office. They noted that the UAE received more than $1.4 billion in arms approvals since January 2025. Furthermore, exports of advanced artificial intelligence chips exceeded $1 billion during the same period.

Democrats want authorities to clarify what officials knew about the reported payments and timing. Therefore, they are seeking records and testimony from relevant parties. The request forms part of a broader effort to examine potential conflicts involving public officials.

The inquiry adds another layer of political pressure on WLFI and its associated projects. At the same time, lawmakers continue to debate how digital asset businesses should operate. As discussions continue, congressional committees may face increased pressure to address the concerns.

Clarity Act Debate Adds New Dimension to Dispute

The controversy has surfaced while Congress continues work on the CLARITY Act. The legislation aims to establish a clearer regulatory framework for digital assets. Therefore, lawmakers remain engaged in negotiations over several key provisions.

Senate Democrats have proposed ethics measures tied to the legislation. The proposal would restrict federal officials from creating, promoting, or sponsoring crypto assets. Consequently, the amendment could affect projects associated with current government officials.

The proposed restrictions could impact crypto ventures linked to Trump. Lawmakers specifically referenced World Liberty Financial and the TRUMP meme coin. As a result, the debate has expanded beyond market regulation and into ethics oversight.

White House crypto adviser Patrick Witt has become involved in discussions surrounding the bill. Reports indicate that he is working to address concerns related to the ethics provisions. Meanwhile, lawmakers continue to negotiate the final structure of the legislation.

Supporters of the ethics proposal argue that stronger safeguards would reduce potential conflicts. However, opponents maintain that broad restrictions could affect participation in emerging technologies. Therefore, the issue remains a key point of disagreement in Congress.

The dispute highlights the growing intersection between digital assets and national politics. At the same time, regulators and lawmakers continue shaping future crypto policy. As congressional discussions move forward, both the WLFI inquiry and the CLARITY Act debate are expected to remain prominent topics.

Cboe, one of the largest U.S. derivatives exchanges, said it is entering the prediction-market arena and is reviving binary options on the S&P 500 index after abandoning them more than a decade ago, a move that brings it into competition with platforms such as Kalshi and the crypto-native Polymarket.

A binary option is a yes-or-no bet that pays a fixed amount if an outcome occurs, in this case whether the benchmark U.S. equity index crosses a specific level. That is close to what Polymarket and Kalshi already offer, though their offerings go beyond stock market forecasts to cover political and sporting outcomes as well as other topics.

The introduction follows Cboe’s success with same-day S&P 500 options, contracts that expire within hours and now make up about 30% of U.S. options volume, calling attention to the demand for fast, outcome-based trades.

“Investors increasingly seek products that allow them to express a specific view on future events and market outcomes,” said Milan Galik, CEO of Interactive Brokers, which is carrying the binary contracts, in a statement.

The contracts will also become available on Charles Schwab later this year.

Second time round

Cboe has tried this market before. It first listed binary options on the S&P 500 and the Cboe Volatility Index in 2008, but they failed to draw interest and were pulled, with the last such contract expiring in 2017.

YZi rejected suggestions that the settlement amounts to a takeover, a person close to the settlement told CoinDesk in an interview, describing it instead as a governance reset intended to unlock shareholder value. The firm also stressed that Binance founder Changpeng “CZ” Zhao was not involved in the initiative.

The investment firm was rebranded from the venture arm of crypto exchange Binance in 2024. Following Zhao’s release from prison that year, he took a more active role in venture project. YZI Labs is often referred to as Zhao’s family office – the name for an investment vehicle that manages a family’s wealth. YZi, however, says its structure is different, as it does not involve itself in estate planning, tax structuring and other similar functions.

YZi’s goal is to reposition CEA as a leading BNB treasury vehicle, comparable to Strategy’s (MSTR) role in bitcoin markets. The firm argues that CEA’s shares trade at a significant discount to the value of its underlying BNB holdings, a gap it believes can be narrowed through governance reforms and a clearer operating strategy.

The move comes as digital asset treasury companies enter what some investors describe as a second phase of development. While early treasury firms focused primarily on accumulating crypto assets, newer models are increasingly looking to generate revenue from ecosystem participation and infrastructure businesses tied to those holdings.

Arredondo argues that the industry has spent years building separate blockchain networks, stablecoins and digital money projects, but has spent less time ensuring those systems can work together.

“We need to move the market from everyone doing their own very cool things to actually thinking about standard-setting across the piece.”

The issue has become more important as governments, banks and private companies increasingly experiment with tokenized deposits, stablecoins and central bank digital currencies (CBDCs).

Arredondo pointed to the European Union (EU) as an example of a jurisdiction seeking to accommodate multiple forms of digital money simultaneously.

The EU’s approach allows stablecoins, tokenized bank deposits and central bank money to coexist under the same broad framework, she said.

Wall Street’s crypto role

The growing role of banks, asset managers and large financial institutions in crypto has divided the industry. Some early crypto supporters argue the sector is moving away from its original goals of decentralization and disintermediation.

Arredondo sees it differently. “The early crypto vision raised fundamental economic questions and brought them to the mainstream,” she said.

For Arredondo, the rise of institutional crypto does not mean the industry’s early ideas failed.

Instead, she sees it as evidence that ideas first developed inside the crypto sphere are increasingly being adopted by mainstream finance. “It shouldn’t be disappointing that we are maintaining the pillars that have long anchored trust in money.”

Key Points

• President Trump postpones housing legislation signing, halting CBDC prohibition.

• Legislation includes provision blocking Federal Reserve digital dollar until 2030.

• Signing contingent on Congressional passage of SAVE America Act.

• Stablecoin exemptions preserved within housing legislation framework.

• Senate faces mounting pressure on cryptocurrency regulatory framework discussions.

President Donald Trump has postponed the implementation of a federal prohibition on central bank digital currencies by canceling Wednesday’s scheduled signing ceremony for comprehensive bipartisan housing legislation. The measure includes provisions preventing the Federal Reserve from launching a digital dollar until 2030, though Trump has made his approval conditional on separate voting reform legislation.

President Conditions Housing Bill on Electoral Reforms

Through a Truth Social announcement, Trump canceled the ceremony mere hours before its scheduled start. He indicated that Congressional approval of the SAVE America Act must occur before he proceeds with the housing package. This decision immediately created uncertainty surrounding the housing bill’s CBDC prohibition language.

The SAVE America Act mandates citizenship verification for individuals registering to vote in federal elections. Proponents characterize this requirement as necessary election integrity protection, while critics contend it may disenfranchise legitimate voters. Trump has urged Senate Republicans to expedite the measure despite minimal Democratic backing.

Congressional approval for the housing bill was substantial, with the House voting 358 to 32 following Senate passage at 85 to five. This bipartisan support demonstrated rare legislative consensus across party lines. Nevertheless, Trump chose to delay the signing despite broad congressional backing.

Digital Currency Ban Embedded in Housing Legislation

The 21st Century ROAD to Housing Act focuses predominantly on housing availability, cost reduction, mortgage regulations, and development obstacles. Yet legislators inserted provisions prohibiting the Federal Reserve from developing or distributing a retail CBDC. This restriction extends through December 31, 2030.

The language encompasses digital instruments that function similarly to central bank digital currencies. Conversely, it carves out private dollar-denominated assets operating on transparent, permissionless, and decentralized networks. This exemption safeguards eligible stablecoins from the federal prohibition.

Trump has previously instructed federal departments to refrain from creating, distributing, or advocating for a United States CBDC absent explicit legislative authority. While the Federal Reserve has conducted digital currency research, no digital dollar has been introduced. The congressional language would codify existing administrative policy into statutory law.

Postponement Creates Uncertainty for Crypto Regulatory Framework

Trump retains the option to sign the housing legislation once Congress addresses his voting reform priorities. Constitutional mechanisms also permit the bill to become law without presidential signature. However, formal transmission procedures and legislative scheduling will dictate available timeframes.

This postponement may generate additional concerns regarding the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act. That legislation would establish regulatory jurisdiction for digital assets and allocate supervision among federal agencies. Trump has expressed support for establishing permanent market structure frameworks for the cryptocurrency industry.

The CLARITY Act awaits Senate deliberation, potential modifications, and ultimate floor consideration. Concurrently, legislators are negotiating ethics requirements concerning political figures’ involvement in digital asset enterprises. The housing bill dispute now introduces another political prerequisite to an already congested Senate agenda.

Trump has not explicitly threatened vetoes against market structure legislation or other cryptocurrency bills. However, his linkage of unrelated measures may decelerate congressional progress across multiple policy domains. The CBDC prohibition consequently remains entangled with broader controversies involving housing policy, electoral procedures, and digital asset oversight.

Several Democrats and one Republican who were supported by more than $8 million worth of ads funded by cryptocurrency-aligned political action committees (PACs) won their respective US primaries on Tuesday, setting up their candidacies for the November election.

Party primaries for US House of Representatives and Senate candidates in Utah, Maryland and New York resulted in wins for many aligned with crypto industry interests. PACs like Fairshake and its affiliates, largely backed by crypto companies Coinbase and Ripple Labs, spent a combined $8 million on media to support the candidates it considered likely in favor of digital asset policies for the next session of Congress.

In New York, Democrat Ritchie Torres won a primary for the state’s 15th congressional district with 71.9% of the vote, while in Utah, Republican Blake Moore won in the 2nd district with 57.5% of the vote. Fairshake affiliate Protect Progress reported $5.5 million in expenditures to support Adrian Boafo, who won the Democratic primary for Maryland’s 5th district with 32% against other candidates who opposed “spending from crypto billionaires.” 

“We went big and we went early,” said Fairshake spokesperson Geoff Vetter. “We did our part to move Adrian Boafo from fifth place to the halls of Congress.”

Source: The New York Times

Fairshake, which reported having “$150 million cash on hand” in June after its spending in several US state primaries, may have already influenced voters in key elections in its attempts to send candidates to Congress it considers to be “pro-crypto.” Other PACs aligned with crypto interests that have reported spending on 2026 candidates included Fellowship, backed by Cantor Fitzgerald and Anchorage Digital, and the Blockchain Leadership Fund, a hybrid PAC backed by Anchorage and Chainlink Labs.

Related: Trump cancels signing of housing bill with CBDC ban

Not every pro-crypto candidate emerged a winner on Tuesday. Alex Bores, a Democrat running in New York’s 12th District, lost to Micah Lasher. He criticized Bores in a June debate, saying that he potentially benefitted from Ripple Labs co-founder Chris Larsen spending $3.5 million to support his campaign.

Next primaries in Colorado and Arizona, but no reports of spending yet

Many expect Fairshake and other crypto-aligned PACs to turn their attention to candidates in Colorado and Arizona next. The two states are scheduled to hold primaries on June 30 and July 21, respectively, but Fairshake affiliates had not disclosed significant spending in any of the races as of Wednesday.

In 2024, the PAC and its affiliates poured more than $10 million into media to support Ruben Gallego’s Senate race in Arizona and $2.1 million for Democratic Representative Yadira Caraveo in Colorado’s 8th district. Gallego won his race, while Caraveo lost in the November 2024 election to Republican Gabe Evans.

Magazine: AI is banking the unbanked in Africa… faster than crypto

Binance has withdrawn its application for a Markets in Crypto-Assets (MiCA) license in Greece and will seek authorization in another European Union country, the crypto exchange said Wednesday via several X posts.

While Binance did not immediately respond to CoinDesk’s request for comment, Gillian Lynch, head of Europe ‌and the United Kingdom, told Reuters that “Binance is not leaving Europe.” Her comment follows her firm’s bid to secure a licence in Greece to offer crypto services in the EU went sour.

Last week, Binance said its European regulatory MiCA application was compliant despite reports of Greek rejection. “Our understanding is that the HCMC (Hellenic Capital Market Commission) completed its review of the application and considered it compliant with MiCA requirements, and that the application was also reviewed at ESMA level,” a Binance spokesman told CoinDesk via email on June 16.

The decision comes days before a June 30 deadline. Under MiCA rules, crypto firms must obtain a license from at least one EU member state by July 1 to serve clients across the 27-nation trading bloc. Unlicensed firms must wind down their EU activities.