Connect with us
DAPA Banner

Crypto World

Ripple CEO Confirms White House Meeting With Crypto and Banking Reps

Published

on

Crypto Breaking News

Washington’s ongoing push to align crypto policy with traditional finance took another step as White House officials hosted a second meeting with industry representatives and banking executives to refine a proposed market-structure bill in the U.S. Senate. The talks, aimed at narrowing gaps on stablecoin yields and other guardrails, arrive amid broader efforts to reconcile consumer protections with U.S. competitiveness in crypto innovation. In a Thursday Fox News appearance, Ripple (the company) CEO Brad Garlinghouse said his company’s chief legal officer, Stuart Alderoty, joined White House officials at the discussions earlier in the day. The remarks followed unconfirmed reports that the administration would push ahead with the CLARITY Act, a framework designed to establish a market structure for digital assets, though no deal was announced at the time of reporting. The evolving dialogue underscores the delicate balance lawmakers seek between enabling financial innovation and safeguarding taxpayers and markets.

Key takeaways

  • White House discussions with crypto and banking representatives continue as lawmakers weigh stablecoin yield provisions and market-structure safeguards.
  • Ripple’s leadership participated in the talks, signaling high-level interest from the sector in shaping policy deliberations.
  • The CLARITY Act remains a focal point in Congress, having passed the House earlier in the year but facing delays in the Senate and ongoing committee scrutiny.
  • Coinbase (EXCHANGE: COIN) CEO Brian Armstrong has publicly challenged certain provisions, arguing they could curb the regulatory role of the CFTC in favor of the SEC and raise concerns about tokenized equities.
  • Crypto policy advocates described the White House meeting as constructive and aimed at a framework that preserves American competitiveness while protecting consumers.

Tickers mentioned: $COIN

Sentiment: Neutral

Market context: The discussions sit within a broader regulatory backdrop as lawmakers and agencies navigate the overlap between traditional securities rules and crypto tokens, with market participants watching for signals on how a potential framework may affect liquidity and risk appetite.

Why it matters

The conversations in Washington reflect a policy environment where the United States is attempting to define a national standard for digital assets without stifling innovation. While lawmakers have advanced parts of their market-structure agenda in some committees, others have pressed pause or demanded clarifications. A central tension is how to treat stablecoins and yield mechanisms—areas that could influence capital flows and the attractiveness of the U.S. as a hub for crypto and blockchain experimentation. The involvement of high-profile industry voices, including Ripple’s Alderoty and Coinbase’s Armstrong, signals that the stakeholder community is intent on shaping the legislative design rather than merely reacting to it.

Advertisement

The CLARITY Act has been a cornerstone in this debate. Passed by the House but hampered by delays in the Senate and internal concerns about conflicts of interest and the scope of regulation, the bill’s path forward hinges on finding consensus around DeFi rules, tokenized equities, and stablecoin governance. The ongoing discourse also highlights the role of regulators—specifically the CFTC and the SEC—in delineating authority over different asset classes. As policy debates intensify, market participants are weighing how any forthcoming framework could alter trading venues, custody standards, and the treatment of tokenized assets within investor portfolios.

From a market perspective, the immediate impact of policy discussions tends to be less about dramatic price shifts and more about positioning and expectations. Traders monitor committee schedules, public statements by key figures, and any formal markup dates that could signal a near-term stance or a shift in trajectory. The meetings also underscore a broader operational reality: policy clarity is often valued more than policy speed, as clearer rules can reduce regulatory risk and encourage longer-horizon project development in the crypto economy.

What to watch next

  • Rescheduling and outcome of the Senate Banking Committee markup on digital asset market structure legislation.
  • Public commentary from White House crypto advisers and other senior policymakers on the CLARITY Act and related regulations.
  • Further statements from the private sector, including the participation of major exchanges and industry groups, on provisions affecting stablecoins and tokenized equities.
  • Any new revelations from meetings hosted at high-profile venues (e.g., discussions linked to industry events or forums) about governance and enforcement expectations.
  • New official documents or filings that detail how the proposed rules might interact with existing CFTC and SEC authorities.

Sources & verification

  • Congress.gov — Text of the CLARITY Act and details on its legislative timeline.
  • YouTube — Brad Garlinghouse Fox News interview referencing Alderoty’s attendance at the White House meeting.
  • Crypto Council for Innovation — Public statements describing the discussions and their constructive tone.
  • Cointelegraph coverage — Reporting on the Mar-a-Lago forum and related policy discussions, including sentiment from lawmakers.

Market reaction and key details

The White House’s latest round of talks with cryptocurrency and banking representatives illustrates a persistent drive to harmonize digital-asset policy with traditional financial oversight. The aim is to craft a framework that resists regulatory fragmentation while ensuring robust protections for consumers and market integrity. In a Thursday appearance on Fox News, Ripple (the company) CEO Brad Garlinghouse reiterated that Alderoty attended the White House discussions earlier in the day, signaling the depth of the policy engagement from the industry side. The remarks followed media speculation about how the administration would approach the CLARITY Act—the House-approved package designed to regulate digital assets and present a coherent market structure—now navigating Senate committees and potential amendments.

The CLARITY Act’s journey through Congress has been irregular. After passing the House in July, the bill faced a series of delays in the Senate, with lawmakers weighing provisions that would influence conflicts of interest and extend governance for decentralized finance, tokenized equities, and stablecoins. The evolving legislative signal is that the administration seeks to balance innovation with safeguards rather than rushing to a verdict. In this context, the meeting with White House officials, as described by Crypto Council for Innovation chief Ji Hun Kim, was noted as constructive and aimed at building a framework that preserves American consumer welfare while maintaining competitive edge in global crypto markets.

Meanwhile, the broader legislative calendar remains complex. The Senate Agriculture Committee earlier advanced its own version of a digital-asset market-structure bill in January, a development that underscores the multi-committee path such legislation often travels before markup and potential floor votes. Yet opposition from some industry players has complicated the process. Coinbase (EXCHANGE: COIN) CEO Brian Armstrong publicly challenged certain provisions that would cap rewards on stablecoin holdings and warned that the bill risks weakening the CFTC’s role in favor of the SEC. These concerns illustrate a familiar tension in U.S. policy debates: how to allocate regulatory authority without constraining innovation or market functionality.

Advertisement

As policymakers navigate these issues, the policy discourse has also touched on high-profile gatherings. A private forum at Mar-a-Lago, attended by policymakers and industry representatives, added another layer to the conversation around the CLARITY Act’s prospects. Senator Bernie Moreno, present at the event, suggested that the act could reach a point where it could be signed into law by spring, though the legislative reality remains uncertain given the ongoing committee reviews and potential revisions. The episodic nature of such appearances reflects the evolving, often negotiation-heavy, path that digital-asset policy typically follows in Washington.

Overall, the latest round of meetings and public statements suggests a cautious but forward-looking stance from both policymakers and industry participants. The objective appears to be a framework that discourages harmful practices, clarifies regulatory jurisdiction, and supports responsible innovation in crypto markets—without stifling the capital flows that underpin a growing ecosystem. For investors and builders, the near-term takeaway is to monitor committee calendars, regulatory updates, and official statements from the White House and key agencies for hints about the direction of risk management, disclosure requirements, and the scope of oversight that a forthcoming bill could impose.

Interim guidance and verbatim quotes from executive statements will likely continue to influence sentiment, particularly as the Senate Banking Committee and other panels recalibrate their approach to market structure, stablecoins, and tokenized assets. In the interim, the market context remains one of guarded optimism, with careful attention paid to regulatory clarity as much as to any immediate policy actions. The interplay between public policy, industry feedback, and the practical realities of operating in a highly dynamic crypto landscape will continue to shape liquidity conditions and risk sentiment in the months ahead.

Notes from the coverage and the primary sources referenced above should be verified for any updates to committee schedules, official statements, or new voting outcomes as the legislative process evolves.

Advertisement

Risk & affiliate notice: Crypto assets are volatile and capital is at risk. This article may contain affiliate links. Read full disclosure

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading
Click to comment

You must be logged in to post a comment Login

Leave a Reply

Crypto World

Circle faces backlash after $285 million Drift hack

Published

on

Circle (CRCL) may rally another 60% driven by stablecoin adoption, AI agentic finance: Bernstein

After the $285 million Drift hack, the focus is shifting to Circle (CRCL) and whether it could have done more to stop the money.

The attacker siphoned off roughly $71 million in USDC as part of the exploit Wednesday, according to blockchain security firm PeckShield. After converting most of the rest of the stolen assets to USDC, the hacker used Circle’s cross-chain transfer protocol, CCTP, to bridge about $232 million in USDC from Solana to Ethereum, making recovery efforts more difficult.

That movement has drawn criticism from parts of the crypto community, including prominent blockchain investigator ZachXBT, who argued Circle could have acted faster to limit the damage.

“Why should crypto businesses continue to build on Circle when a project with 9 fig[ure] TVL [total value locked] could not get support during a major incident?,” he said in an X post following the attack.

Advertisement

To freeze or not to freeze

The company had tools at its disposal, ZachXBT pointed out. Under its own terms, Circle reserves the right to blacklist addresses and freeze USDC tied to any suspicious activity.

Preemptively freezing wallets linked to the exploit could have slowed or stopped the attacker’s ability to move funds, one stablecoin infrastructure firm founder told CoinDesk.

However, acting without a court order or law enforcement request might expose Circle to legal risk, the person added.

Salman Banei, general counsel of tokenized asset network Plume, said freezing assets without formal authorization could expose issuers to liability if done incorrectly. He argued regulators should address that legal gap.

Advertisement

“Lawmakers should provide a safe harbor from civil liability if digital asset issuers freeze assets when, in their reasonable judgment, there is strong basis to believe that illicit transfers have occurred,” Banei said.

That constraint was central to the company’s response.

“Circle is a regulated company that complies with sanctions, law enforcement orders, and court-mandated requirements,” a spokesperson said in an email to CoinDesk. “We freeze assets when legally required, consistent with the rule of law and with strong protections for user rights and privacy.”

‘Gray zone’

The episode highlights a deeper tension that’s drawing increasing scrutiny as stablecoins grow.

Advertisement

Tokens like USDC are becoming a core part of global money flows, especially for cross-border payments and trading. At the same time, they are also used in illicit activity, putting issuers under pressure to act quickly when things go wrong.

According to TRM Labs, roughly $141 billion in stablecoin transactions in 2025 were linked to illicit activity, including sanctions evasion and money laundering.

Blockchain security firms pointed to North Korean hackers as likely being behind the Drift exploit.

Stablecoins issued by centralized, regulated entities like Circle’s USDC are designed to be programmable and controllable, a feature that can help stop illicit flows but could also raise concerns about overreach and due process.

Advertisement

In the Drift exploit’s case, the situation isn’t that clear-cut, said Ben Levit, founder and CEO of stablecoin ratings agency Bluechip.

“I think people are framing this too simplistically as ‘Circle should’ve frozen,’” he said. “This wasn’t a clean hack, it was more of a market/oracle exploit, which puts it in a gray zone.”

“So any action by Circle becomes a judgment call, not just a compliance decision,” he added.

To him, the bigger issue is consistency. “USDC can’t be positioned as neutral infrastructure while also allowing discretionary intervention without clear rules,” Levit said. “Markets can handle strict policies or no intervention, but ambiguity is much harder to price.”

Advertisement

That leaves issuers in a difficult position. Moving too slowly risks criticism that they are enabling bad actors, while acting too quickly without legal backing raises concerns about overreach.

And in fast-moving exploits, that trade-off becomes especially stark, with the window to act often measured in minutes rather than weeks or months of legal processes.

Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Crypto World

US Community Banks Push Back on Coinbase Trust Charter Approval

Published

on

Coinbase, Banks, Bank of America, United States

The Independent Community Bankers of America has opposed the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency’s (OCC) conditional approval of Coinbase’s national trust bank charter, warning the application falls short of regulatory standards and could pose risks to consumers and the financial system.

On Thursday, ICBA said Coinbase’s application shows deficiencies in risk controls, profitability and resolution planning, and argued the OCC lacks statutory authority to expand trust powers for crypto-related activities without applying the full set of banking regulations.

The group said the decision reflects a broader trend of nonbank entities seeking access to the benefits of bank charters without meeting the same regulatory requirements. It wrote:

The sudden influx of applications demonstrates nonbank entities are seeking the benefits of a US bank charter without satisfying the full scope of US bank regulations.

Americans for Financial Reform Education Fund also criticized the decision, warning the approval departs from longstanding banking law and could expose the financial system to risks tied to crypto market volatility, fraud and money laundering.

Advertisement

The objections follows the OCC’s conditional approval on Thursday of Coinbase’s application to establish a national trust bank, after six months of review by the US regulator.

Coinbase, Banks, Bank of America, United States
Industry opposition to OCC’s Coinbase approval is growing. Source: Americans for Financial Reform Education Fund

Coinbase released a statement on Thursday saying the charter would bring its custody and market infrastructure business under federal oversight, emphasizing that it does not plan to hold customer deposits or engage in fractional reserve lending, and adding that “the right path forward for crypto is through the system — not around it.”

Related: Crypto awareness tops 80% among young people in UK: Coinbase survey

Stablecoin yield dispute stalls crypto market structure bill

The opposition is part of a broader dispute between banking groups and crypto companies over the role of digital assets in the financial system, particularly around stablecoins and yield-bearing products.

In January, CEO of Bank of America Brian Moynihan warned that allowing stablecoin issuers to offer interest could draw as much as $6 trillion in deposits out of the banking system, reducing lending capacity and pushing borrowing costs higher.

Advertisement

Industry groups such as the Bank Policy Institute have also raised similar concerns in letters to lawmakers, arguing that regulatory gaps could allow yield-bearing stablecoin products to bypass restrictions and disrupt traditional credit channels.

The debate is currently playing out in Washington, where Coinbase is engaged in policy discussions over the US Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, a bill aimed at establishing federal rules for crypto oversight.

Coinbase, Banks, Bank of America, United States
Source: Brian Armstrong

While Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong said in January that the company could not support the legislation as drafted due to restrictions on stablecoin rewards, Coinbase chief legal officer Paul Grewal said on Thursday that lawmakers are nearing agreement on core elements of the bill, though the yield issue remains a key sticking point.

The dispute has delayed a Senate Banking Committee markup, a required step before the bill can advance to a full Senate vote, leaving broader efforts to establish a federal framework for digital assets unresolved.

Magazine: Nobody knows if quantum secure cryptography will even work

Advertisement