SharpLink CEO Joseph Chalom has opposed an Ethereum proposal that could eventually eliminate issuance-based staking rewards, warning that the change may weaken ETH’s appeal to institutions and raise capital costs across decentralized finance.

SharpLink challenges Ethereum staking proposal

Chalom said the proposed issuance model would damage one of Ethereum’s main economic advantages by gradually destroying part of the rewards paid to validators.

The SharpLink executive referred to the plan as EIP-8363. However, the mechanism he described matches EIP-8361, the Tapered Issuance Burn proposal previously covered by crypto.news.

EIP-8361 would burn a growing percentage of consensus-layer rewards as more ETH enters staking. The burn rate would reach 100% when approximately 60.25 million ETH, or about half of Ethereum’s current supply, is staked.

Validators would then stop receiving newly issued ETH but could continue earning transaction priority fees and maximal extractable value. The proposal includes an estimated 18-month transition intended to prevent an immediate decline in returns.

Chalom said Ethereum currently offers a variable staking yield of approximately 2.75%. According to his assessment, transaction-related earnings account for only about 15% of total validator rewards, leaving operators heavily dependent on issuance.

Zero ETH yield could pressure DeFi collateral

Chalom argued that Ethereum’s staking yield serves as a benchmark for interest rates across its on-chain economy. Liquid staking tokens use validator rewards to generate returns while allowing holders to deploy the underlying value across lending and other DeFi markets.

Around $35 billion is currently locked in liquid staking products, according to figures cited by Chalom. He warned that reducing issuance rewards to zero could increase the effective cost of capital and make returns negative after infrastructure expenses and other operational costs.

That pressure could cause collateral to move toward assets that continue producing yield. Independent validators and smaller staking operators may face the greatest impact because they lack the scale and additional revenue sources available to larger providers.

The proposal’s authors have taken a different view. They argue that Ethereum’s current issuance curve continues encouraging additional staking even after more deposits provide limited security benefits.

“The current issuance curve continues offering a yield of around 1.5% even if nearly all ETH is staked,” the authors wrote in the proposal.

EIP-8361 remains a draft and has not been approved for inclusion in an Ethereum network upgrade.

SharpLink says yield gives ETH an institutional edge

Chalom also argued that native yield is one reason institutions may choose Ethereum over Bitcoin. Bitcoin can provide price exposure and serve as a treasury reserve, but it does not produce protocol-native returns for holders.

That distinction is central to SharpLink’s own strategy. As reported by crypto.news, the Nasdaq-listed company had staked nearly 900,000 ETH and earned more than 18,000 ETH in cumulative rewards by April.

SharpLink has also expanded beyond basic validator returns. In May, it committed $100 million to a $125 million on-chain yield fund managed by Galaxy Digital. The fund plans to deploy capital across DeFi liquidity protocols while preserving SharpLink’s broader ETH exposure.

Chalom said issuance represents a transfer of value to validators that secure Ethereum rather than a cost paid to an outside party. Burning those rewards, in his view, would remove value from network participants instead of redistributing it within the ecosystem.

US Ethereum products have started distributing yield

The dispute comes as staking becomes more accessible to U.S. institutional investors. Grayscale completed the first staking-reward distribution by a U.S.-listed Ethereum exchange-traded product in January.

Its ETHE product distributed approximately $9.4 million in cash generated from staking activity. The structure allowed shareholders to receive Ethereum-linked income without operating validators or directly managing staked ETH.

Chalom said SharpLink agrees with the proposal authors’ goal of limiting excessive staking and supporting ETH scarcity. However, he argued that Ethereum should pursue that objective through its existing base-fee burn rather than changing the protocol’s issuance-based reward structure.

ETH traded near $1,916 at the time of writing, with no clear price reaction directly linked to SharpLink’s opposition. Debate over the proposal is expected to continue before developers consider whether it should advance toward a future network upgrade.

At just 18 years old, Efe Kelemci, better known as Crypto Kid, sat down with Changpeng Zhao (CZ), the co-founder of Binance and one of the world’s richest men.

The rare conversation took place around the launch of CZ’s book, Freedom of Money, but quickly expanded into a broader discussion about how the financial system works, the limitations of traditional money and the role Bitcoin and blockchain could play in giving individuals greater control over their wealth.

Rather than concentrating entirely on Bitcoin’s price or the next cryptocurrency market cycle, Crypto Kid asks CZ to explain the principles behind financial freedom in a way that can be understood by younger people and readers who may not yet be familiar with digital assets.

The result is a brief but substantive interview between Crypto Kid and CZ covering monetary sovereignty, inflation, cryptocurrency adoption and the importance of understanding the financial system before approaching crypto purely as an investment.

A Young Perspective on Money and Financial Freedom

Crypto Kid approaches the conversation from the perspective of a generation that has grown up alongside Bitcoin and digital assets.

At the beginning of the interview, he explains just how early his interest in the industry began:

“I’ve been in crypto since I was 12.”

Now 18, his questions reflect many of the concerns younger people have when they begin thinking about money, investing and their financial future.

What does it mean to have genuine control over personal wealth? Why can money held within the traditional financial system lose purchasing power? Should cryptocurrency be viewed primarily as an investment, or does the underlying technology serve a more fundamental purpose?

By placing these questions at the centre of the discussion, Crypto Kid gives CZ an opportunity to explain the ideas behind Freedom of Money to an audience extending beyond experienced cryptocurrency investors.

Why CZ Believes People Misunderstand Money

One of CZ’s strongest arguments is that society rarely encourages people to examine the nature of money itself.

“We’re brainwashed to think about money in a very simplistic way.”

Most people earn money, deposit it into a bank, spend it and invest what remains. Yet comparatively few stop to consider what their bank balance represents, what guarantees their access to it or how monetary policy affects its purchasing power.

CZ challenges the assumption that money held within the traditional system always provides complete ownership. He points to the possibility of frozen accounts, restrictions on certain transactions and the cost and delay involved in transferring significant amounts internationally.

He also describes conventional currency as a form of debt, arguing that what people commonly treat as money ultimately depends on promises made and enforced by institutions.

“Paper money is actually debt.”

The problem becomes even more visible when the supply of that money expands. When additional currency enters circulation, the nominal balance in an account may remain unchanged while its real purchasing power declines.

From CZ’s perspective, this creates a form of financial dependence that many people accept without questioning.

“You don’t have a lot of freedom with your money.”

This is the central problem that Freedom of Money attempts to explore. Financial freedom cannot be measured only by the amount someone possesses. It must also consider the degree of control that person has over storing, protecting and transferring it.

How Crypto Could Give People More Control Over Money

In the interview, CZ does not describe cryptocurrency merely as an asset capable of appreciating in price. He presents it as an alternative monetary infrastructure.

Blockchain enables people to hold digital assets directly, transfer value across borders and interact with a global financial network that does not operate according to all the same limitations as conventional banking systems.

That does not eliminate risk or personal responsibility. It changes where responsibility is placed.

With direct ownership comes the need to understand custody, security and the technology being used. However, it may also give individuals a level of control that is not always available when every transaction depends on an intermediary.

“You want sovereignty. You want control over your money.”

The word sovereignty is crucial here. CZ is not simply describing the ability to make profitable investments. He is describing money that individuals can store themselves, move internationally and use without another party being able to create additional units of it at will.

In that sense, the case for cryptocurrency is not solely financial. It is also technological and philosophical.

“The blockchain increases the freedom of money.”

CZ places this development within a wider historical pattern. Civilisation has repeatedly advanced by expanding different forms of freedom, including freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of information and access to knowledge through the internet.

Blockchain, in his view, represents another step in that progression by expanding the freedom associated with owning and transferring value.

Financial Freedom Is Not the Same as Getting Rich Quickly

Crypto Kid then raises a question that reflects how many newcomers first approach the industry.

“How do I get rich quick?”

It is a simple question, but it exposes one of the biggest contradictions in cryptocurrency.

Bitcoin was created as an alternative to a monetary system based on centralised control. Yet many people enter the market with the sole objective of accumulating more of the same fiat currency from which Bitcoin was designed to provide an alternative.

CZ’s response redirects the discussion away from rapid gains.

“The freedom is really the key.”

Someone may generate a large profit and still remain dependent on a system capable of restricting access, expanding the money supply or reducing the value of their savings.

From this perspective, wealth without sovereignty is incomplete. The real objective is not simply to increase the number displayed in an account, but to gain greater control over what that value represents and how it can be used.

CZ argues that when people focus exclusively on maximising their holdings in traditional currency, they remain trapped within the same framework they claim to be escaping.

The conversation therefore reframes financial freedom. It is not a winning trade, an early retirement target or a particular Bitcoin price. It is the ability to make informed decisions about money while reducing dependence on systems over which the individual has little influence.

CZ’s Advice to Young People: Understand the Financial System First

The interview becomes especially relevant when Crypto Kid asks what younger people should do when entering the industry.

Cryptocurrency content aimed at new investors often concentrates on charts, tokens and opportunities to generate rapid returns. CZ gives almost the opposite advice.

Speaking about highly speculative trading, he says:

“I would actually recommend youngsters not to try that.”

Instead of beginning with price speculation, CZ encourages young people to learn how money and blockchain technology work, experiment on a small scale and explore the problems the technology could solve.

He points towards practical applications such as micropayments, international transfers and payments performed by artificial intelligence agents.

“Look at more of the utility value of crypto.”

This distinction between utility and speculation may be one of the most valuable lessons in the interview.

Trading asks what an asset might be worth tomorrow. Building asks what the technology could make possible over the next decade.

For young people entering the space, the second question may create far more meaningful opportunities. The cryptocurrency industry still needs developers, entrepreneurs, educators, researchers, product designers and creators capable of turning blockchain infrastructure into applications that ordinary people can use.

CZ compares the present stage of crypto development to the earlier days of the internet, when the basic protocols existed but many of the products that would eventually transform everyday life had not yet been created.

His message is not that young people must ignore cryptocurrency markets entirely. It is that they should first develop a strong understanding of the financial system, the technology and its possible uses, so that price is no longer their only reason to participate.

Bitcoin’s Price May Be Disappointing, but Adoption Is Still Early

Towards the end of the conversation, Crypto Kid asks CZ about Bitcoin’s recent price performance and the frustration felt by investors who expected the market to move higher.

CZ acknowledges that he shared those expectations. He had also believed Bitcoin would be trading at a higher level.

However, he notes that a significant amount of speculative capital moved towards artificial intelligence. While this may have weakened crypto momentum in the short term, he suggests that it could ultimately allow the market to grow on more stable foundations.

The more important point is that CZ does not measure Bitcoin’s future solely through its latest market cycle.

“Less than 1% of the world” currently uses cryptocurrency.

Whatever the precise figure, his broader point is clear: CZ believes the industry remains far from mass adoption.

Billions of people still do not directly own cryptocurrency, use blockchain-based payments or interact with decentralised financial infrastructure. Many businesses and institutions are also only beginning to explore how digital assets could fit into their operations.

From that perspective, Bitcoin’s present price becomes one data point inside a much larger adoption story.

The long-term opportunity depends less on whether the market reaches a particular target this year and more on whether blockchain technology becomes genuinely useful to a wider section of the global population.

The Story Behind Freedom of Money

The interview also briefly addresses the personal circumstances surrounding the creation of CZ’s book.

CZ explains that he began writing its first draft while in prison, where the lack of distractions gave him time to reflect on his journey and the evolution of the cryptocurrency industry.

The conversation does not remain focused on that period. Instead, it uses the experience as context for understanding why the themes of freedom, uncertainty and personal control became central to the book.

CZ later spent considerable time revising and completing the manuscript. The finished work combines his personal experience with his perspective on how cryptocurrency has developed since he entered the industry in 2013.

For readers, the book provides CZ’s personal account of a period that took Bitcoin from a relatively small technological experiment to a globally recognised financial asset and infrastructure layer.

Financial Freedom Begins With Better Questions

The strongest message from the conversation is not that people should buy cryptocurrency immediately or expect Bitcoin to make them rich.

It is that they should understand the money they already use.

Who controls it? What can reduce its value? Under what circumstances can access to it be limited? How easily can it move across borders? And which alternatives now exist?

Blockchain does not automatically answer every financial problem. It does, however, introduce new choices around custody, scarcity, payments and ownership.

For CZ, those choices are the foundation of monetary freedom. For Crypto Kid and the younger generation he represents, the opportunity is to understand that technology early enough to help shape what comes next.

The conversation ultimately encourages viewers to replace the question “How quickly can crypto make me rich?” with a more important one:

How much freedom do I really have over my money?

Watch the Full Interview

Watch Crypto Kid’s complete interview with Binance co-founder CZ on YouTube.

Follow Crypto Kid

Learn more about Efe Kelemci and his work through the official Crypto Kid website. You can also follow Crypto Kid on X, Instagram and LinkedIn.

Follow CZ

Follow Changpeng Zhao on X for his latest perspectives on Bitcoin, cryptocurrency adoption, entrepreneurship and the future of finance.

Bitcoin users are revisiting a core assumption about self-custody after the disclosure of a “low-entropy” issue tied to Coldcard hardware wallet firmware. According to reporting and analysis referenced in the crypto community, publicly observed thefts linked to the flaw began around July 30, prompting investors and long-time hardware wallet holders to scrutinize how their seed phrases are generated.

While Coldcard’s devices have long been valued for offline security and user control, the episode highlights an uncomfortable truth: if the randomness used to create a wallet’s seed can be predicted or effectively reduced, attackers may brute-force private keys. The situation has also reignited debate inside the ecosystem about what it actually means to “verify” secure entropy—and how much should be outsourced to hardware versus performed by the user.

Key takeaways

• Coldcard firmware starting with version 4.0.1 (released March 2021) is described as using MicroPython’s Yasmarang PRNG instead of relying correctly on the device’s STM32 hardware RNG.
• Coinkite estimated that affected Coldcard models produced seeds with roughly 40 bits of entropy (Mk2/Mk3) or around 70 bits (Mk4/Mk5/Q), which falls short of what’s needed for a robust 12-word BIP-39 seed.
• Attackers reportedly brute-forced private keys after the issue became known, with Cointelegraph coverage cited as placing stolen value at over $100 million in BTC.
• Users who generated seed phrases using sufficient physical entropy (e.g., dice) have been argued to reduce reliance on the compromised randomness path.
• Community tools such as honeypot monitoring have been used to estimate which wallet types attackers are sweeping effectively.

What changed in Coldcard’s randomness generation

The central technical claim is that Coldcard hardware wallets contained what appeared to be functional STM32 “true random number generators” (TRNGs) designed to produce unguessable seed phrases. However, after Coldcard creator NVK initiated a firmware rewrite intended to move from a GPL-licensed free software model to a read-only model, analysts say a serious vulnerability was introduced.

Starting with firmware version 4.0.1, released in March 2021, the device reportedly switched to MicroPython’s Yasmarang PRNG rather than properly using the STM32 hardware RNG. Random number generation is described as inherently difficult for computer systems, and secure seed creation is typically expected to incorporate enough external physical unpredictability to make outputs infeasible to guess.

In the ecosystem, the Yasmarang PRNG has been widely characterized as a pre-programmed fallback. A referenced engineering analysis from Block that explains “predictable RNG fallback” and the mechanics of a “32-bit reseed” approach was linked by the article’s source material. Coinkite later disputed that characterization in an X post, challenging the conclusion that the device was simply hardwired to an obviously weak method.

Even with that dispute, the broader implication remains: when a wallet’s seed generation is not truly unpredictable, private keys may become searchable. The article’s source material notes speculation on X about whether a backdoor was deliberately placed, and it also cites a Bitcoin journalist’s view that the bug may have arisen from development practices and attempts to suppress errors through randomized changes.

Entropy levels, seed security, and why brute force mattered

Coinkite’s estimates cited in the source material are specific about the magnitude of the problem. It estimated that Mk2 and Mk3 devices generated seeds with about 40 bits of entropy, while Mk4, Mk5, and Q achieved roughly 70 bits. As the source notes, both figures are well short of the 128-bit level generally treated as sufficient for a secure 12-word seed phrase.

That shortfall matters because it reshapes the threat model. Instead of requiring attackers to brute-force astronomical keyspaces, lower effective entropy can make key discovery drastically more practical. The source material further states that after the flaw, attackers succeeded in brute-forcing private keys and stealing funds, pointing to Cointelegraph coverage that described thefts exceeding $100 million worth of BTC.

The likelihood of whether a specific wallet was found and swept is presented as depending on additional variables—such as whether extra “dice entropy” was added, or whether a BIP-39 passphrase and a non-standard derivation path were used. Those details underline a key uncertainty for readers: the exploit’s impact may not have been uniform across all users and all wallet setups.

Using physical entropy to reduce reliance on hardware

Beyond the immediate controversy around Coldcard firmware, the episode has reinforced a recurring community principle: “Don’t trust, verify.” The source material argues that users who avoided relying on opaque hardware generation for the most security-critical step—seed creation—had a better chance of preventing exposure to the low-entropy issue.

The practical point is that rolling dice provides a process users can observe and audit themselves. Verifying a TRNG’s quality, by contrast, would require detailed inspection of electronics and firmware—work most users cannot feasibly perform.

Importantly, the source material suggests that safe self-custody still does not require relinquishing the ability to cross-check. If the seed phrase is generated from physical entropy, the user’s dependence on the compromised hardware path is reduced. It also describes ways to validate whether derived artifacts match across devices—such as importing the same seed into another device to cross-check the resulting xpub and receiving addresses.

For detecting other classes of compromise, the source material also mentions checking signatures: nonce exfiltration through an airgap can be detected by comparing whether two devices generate the same signature when given an identical unsigned transaction, referencing RFC 6979 for deterministic signing behavior.

While these checks can’t replace true unpredictability at the moment entropy is created, they create additional hurdles for attackers and can help users spot irregularities in how transactions are processed and signed.

How the community is generating entropy without trusting a single device

After the exploit became public, the source material says methods and proposals for generating entropy directly from physical inputs accelerated across the community. One widely used approach described involves validating dice-to-seed conversion by cross-checking the device’s ability to correctly transform die faces into a BIP-39 seed phrase via hashing. The article states that using upward of 100 dice throws can be enough to generate entropy for a 24-word seed.

Other options include paper-based systems. The source cites a table published by Bitbox that uses a lookup method to map combinations of dice outcomes—plus a coinflip—directly to BIP-39 seed words without electronics. More advanced worksheets are also referenced, including a codex32 dice de-biasing approach that uses a van Neumann extractor so biased dice can still yield secure seed material that can be computed by hand.

For users seeking convenience, the source material points to alternatives that reduce error-proneness, such as printing and cutting BIP-39 word fragments, shuffling them, and drawing random words—methods made easier by products like Seedsticks or Entropia. It also references specialized hardware intended to verifiably distribute entropy across devices, alongside examples of community-designed physical entropy generators shared on X.

Taken together, these ideas shift the emphasis from “which hardware wallet is most trusted” to “how randomness is sourced at the moment security depends on it.” In practice, the Coldcard incident has encouraged many users to treat seed creation less like a black-box procedure and more like a process they can replicate and reason about.

Going forward, readers should watch for clearer technical consensus on exactly how the affected firmware path produced low-entropy outputs in different models, and for continued analysis tools—such as honeypot tracking mentioned in the source—to refine estimates of which wallet behaviors remain most resilient. Until then, the safest operational takeaway is straightforward: wherever possible, make seed generation as independently verifiable as the rest of your self-custody workflow.

The CFTC has warned regulated prediction markets against displaying American-style gambling odds as state authorities intensify efforts to classify sports event contracts as unlicensed betting.

CFTC warns prediction markets over odds displays

The Commodity Futures Trading Commission instructed regulated prediction market platforms not to display contracts using American-style gambling odds, according to an Aug. 7 Bloomberg report.

American odds typically show potential returns using positive and negative numbers, such as +150 or -200. Sportsbooks commonly use this format, while prediction markets usually price contracts between $0 and $1 based on the implied probability of an event.

The CFTC also reminded registered entities that event contracts remain subject to U.S. derivatives laws. Platforms must avoid “deceptive” practices when listing, advertising, or soliciting trades in these products.

The guidance suggests that federal registration does not allow prediction markets to advertise their products in a manner that makes them indistinguishable from conventional sportsbooks. It comes as the agency continues defending its authority over event contracts against state gaming regulators.

The CFTC maintains that designated contract markets fall under its exclusive jurisdiction through the Commodity Exchange Act. State officials argue that contracts tied to sporting events constitute wagers and require local gambling licenses.

State lawsuits challenge CFTC jurisdiction

New York became the latest state to escalate the dispute when Attorney General Letitia James sued Kalshi on July 31. As crypto.news reported, the state is seeking at least $36 billion in damages and penalties.

The complaint alleges that Kalshi operates an unlicensed gambling business by allowing New York residents to trade contracts on sports and other events. Kalshi has denied that characterization and argues that its status as a CFTC-regulated exchange places it outside state gambling oversight.

The dispute extends well beyond New York. Attorneys general from 44 states recently urged the CFTC to withdraw and rewrite its proposed prediction market rules. They argued that states have traditionally regulated sports betting and should retain authority over sports-related contracts.

Courts have also questioned the federal regulator’s position. A Wisconsin federal court rejected the CFTC’s request to prevent state authorities from applying gambling laws to prediction platforms.

Washington secured a preliminary injunction against Kalshi in July. The court found that federal derivatives law did not prevent the state from enforcing its gambling restrictions, according to earlier crypto.news coverage.

Kalshi seeks emergency relief in Utah

Kalshi filed an emergency motion for an injunction pending appeal after a Utah federal court ruled that the state could enforce its anti-gambling laws against prediction markets.

Gaming law expert Daniel Wallach said the company requested expedited relief because it fears Utah Attorney General Derek Brown could pursue civil or criminal charges while the appeal remains pending.

The ruling rejected Kalshi’s claim that the Commodity Exchange Act prevents Utah from regulating its sports event contracts. Kalshi intends to take the dispute to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit.

Utah residents could still access the platform immediately following the decision, but Brown indicated that the state planned to enforce its gambling laws. The state has not disclosed what form that enforcement will take.

Prediction markets face tighter compliance demands

The latest warning shows that the CFTC’s support for federal jurisdiction does not remove compliance obligations for prediction market operators.

The agency has also pursued misconduct on regulated platforms. Former U.S. Representative George Santos recently agreed to return $17,569.98 in trading gains, pay a $17,500 penalty, and accept a three-year trading ban over Kalshi contracts, as crypto.news reported.

The CFTC’s warning could require platforms to review how they display contract prices and promote sports-related products. Meanwhile, pending appeals in Utah and other states will help determine whether federal registration can shield prediction markets from local gambling laws.

The United States Senate postponed action on the Clarity Act until September, extending uncertainty across the digital asset market. The delay removed a key legislative event that market participants expected before the August recess. Meanwhile, Bitwise Chief Investment Officer Matt Hougan said weaker expectations for the bill could trigger brief market pressure before conditions improve later this year.

Senate Pushes Clarity Act Vote to September

Senate leaders confirmed that lawmakers will not consider the Clarity Act before the August recess. Instead, they scheduled the legislation for consideration after Congress returns in September. As a result, the digital asset industry faces another period without a clear federal regulatory framework.

The bill aims to establish clear oversight for digital assets across the United States. It also defines the responsibilities of the Securities and Exchange Commission and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission. Therefore, many industry participants consider the proposal an important step toward regulatory certainty.

Republican lawmakers currently hold 53 Senate seats, yet the legislation requires 60 votes to overcome a filibuster. Consequently, bipartisan support remains necessary before the bill can advance. Lawmakers also continue negotiations over ethics rules, illicit finance measures, and consumer protection requirements.

Bitwise Expects Brief Market Weakness Before Potential Recovery

Bitwise Chief Investment Officer Matt Hougan addressed the delayed legislation in a recent company memo. He said lower expectations for the Clarity Act could remove uncertainty surrounding the Senate timetable. He added that the market could experience a short period of weakness before recovering later in the year.

Hougan pointed to prediction market expectations surrounding the legislation during his assessment. He said the probability of passage during 2026 should decline sharply if lawmakers fail to approve the bill this week. According to his view, reduced expectations could eliminate a major source of short-term uncertainty.

He also stated that the crypto market could weaken briefly after expectations adjust. However, he suggested that a clearer outlook may create stronger conditions during the fall. Therefore, the immediate reaction could remain temporary if legislative uncertainty declines.

Bitcoin, Ethereum, and XRP Hold Key Levels as Regulatory Debate Continues

Bitcoin continued trading above $64,400 despite the Senate postponement and broader policy uncertainty. At the same time, Ethereum remained above $1,900, while XRP traded near $1.05. Those price levels reflected a relatively stable market despite delayed legislative action.

The Clarity Act remains one of the most significant digital asset proposals under consideration in Washington. The legislation seeks to separate regulatory responsibilities between the SEC and the CFTC. In addition, it intends to provide clearer compliance standards for digital asset businesses operating in the United States.

Negotiators continue discussing several disputed provisions before the Senate resumes its work. One proposal could require President Donald Trump to divest from certain crypto-related business interests under new ethics rules. Meanwhile, President Trump has continued supporting policies that maintain United States leadership in digital asset innovation instead of allowing China to strengthen its position in the sector.

The delayed vote leaves the regulatory timetable unresolved as lawmakers continue negotiations during the congressional recess. Although the legislation remains active, its final form still depends on bipartisan agreement. Until then, the digital asset market will continue operating without the comprehensive federal framework that many industry participants have sought for years.