Crypto World
The U.S. Bitcoin Reserve blueprint is due in July
It has been more than a year since President Trump signed the executive order establishing a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve on March 6, 2025, and the project is finally moving from rhetoric toward machinery.
Summary
- The U.S. already has a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, but it mostly holds seized Bitcoin rather than newly purchased BTC.
- July matters because the White House blueprint and Congress could clarify whether the reserve can become an actual buying program.
- The BITCOIN Act pushes for aggressive accumulation, while ARMA favors a 20-year lockup and a more moderate path.
- The budget-neutral rule is the hidden constraint that could limit how much Bitcoin the U.S. can realistically buy.
A White House report in July 2025 laid out the policy blueprint. In May 2026, Patrick Witt of the President’s Council of Advisors for Digital Assets called the latest progress a “breakthrough” and signaled concrete announcements were close. Two competing bills now sit in Congress: Senator Cynthia Lummis’s BITCOIN Act, which would have the Treasury begin actual purchases as soon as Q4 2026, and Representative Nick Begich’s rebranded American Reserve Modernization Act, which quietly dropped the headline one-million-Bitcoin purchase target and added a 20-year lockup instead.
As the one-year mark of the blueprint approaches this July, the question is no longer whether the U.S. has a Bitcoin reserve. It already does, on paper. The question is whether July brings the thing that would make it real: a legal path to actually buy Bitcoin. This piece lays out what exists now, what is expected, and why the gap between the two is the whole story.
What already exists
The first thing to get straight is that the United States already has a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve. It has had one since March 2025. What it does not have is a reserve that does what the headlines implied.
The March 6, 2025 executive order created two things: a Strategic Bitcoin Reserve, capitalized with Bitcoin the government already owned through criminal and civil asset forfeiture, and a separate U.S. Digital Asset Stockpile for the non-Bitcoin crypto the Treasury had seized. The order made one commitment crystal clear. The Bitcoin in the reserve “shall not be sold and shall be maintained as reserve assets.” That is a directive to hold, full stop.
What the order did not do was authorize the government to buy any Bitcoin with public money. It instructed the Treasury and Commerce Secretaries to develop “budget-neutral” strategies for acquiring more, meaning any purchases would have to be funded without costing taxpayers a cent, through forfeiture proceeds or penalties rather than appropriated dollars. And Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent confirmed in August 2025 that the U.S. “won’t be buying” additional Bitcoin in the near term. So the reserve, as it actually exists, is a rebranding of coins the government already held, with a promise not to sell them.
That is why critics were unimpressed at the launch. Charles Edwards of Capriole Investments called the reserve “a pig in lipstick,” arguing it just renamed existing holdings without any plan for fresh purchases. The “digital Fort Knox” rhetoric from White House crypto figures collided with the operational reality: Fort Knox holds gold the government actively acquired, while the SBR holds Bitcoin the government happened to seize from criminals. The gap between those two things is exactly what the upcoming work is supposed to close.
What the July 2025 blueprint actually said
The blueprint people are now waiting to see built on came out on July 30, 2025, when the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets released its report after a 180-day review.
The working group, with Treasury Secretary Bessent, Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, and SEC Chair Paul Atkins as key members, produced what Atkins described as a blueprint to make America “the crypto capital of the world.” On the reserve specifically, the report confirmed the hold-don’t-sell policy and the budget-neutral acquisition framework. It also went broader, recommending that the SEC and CFTC use their existing authorities to enable crypto trading at the federal level and that agencies relaunch efforts on bank crypto custody, stablecoin reserves, and tokenization.
The report also surfaced an uncomfortable detail that complicates the entire reserve concept. While the government officially owns forfeited assets, seized assets are often earmarked to compensate victims of the hacks and scams they came from, or to flow into the general Treasury, rather than being available to lock away in a permanent reserve. In other words, a chunk of the Bitcoin people assume sits in the reserve may be legally spoken for. That accounting problem is part of why Witt said the priority was to “get our own house in order” before disclosing the size of the government’s holdings.
So the July 2025 blueprint set the policy direction clearly. What it could not do, because an executive order and a working-group report cannot do it, is create the legal authority to hold Bitcoin permanently and buy more. That requires Congress.
The two bills that would make it real
This is where the live action is, and where July matters. Two pieces of legislation would convert the reserve from a holding directive into a genuine accumulation program, and they take very different approaches.
The BITCOIN Act, championed in the Senate by Cynthia Lummis, is the maximalist version. It is the bill that originally carried the headline target of the U.S. acquiring one million Bitcoin over time. If it passes, analysts estimate the Treasury could begin its first official Bitcoin purchase as soon as Q4 2026, which would make the United States the first sovereign nation to actively accumulate Bitcoin as a strategic reserve asset rather than simply holding what it seized. Lummis has been the most aggressive congressional voice for treating Bitcoin like a true strategic reserve on par with gold.
The American Reserve Modernization Act, or ARMA, is the House version, introduced by Nick Begich of Alaska with Democrat Jared Golden of Maine as co-lead. The rename from Begich’s earlier version was a deliberate move to broaden bipartisan appeal, and the substance shifted too. ARMA quietly dropped the one-million-Bitcoin purchase target that anchored the BITCOIN Act. In its place it added a hard 20-year lockup, requiring all Bitcoin deposited into the reserve to sit untouched for at least two decades, barring the government from “selling, swapping, auctioning, encumbering, or otherwise disposing of” it for any reason.
That difference is the whole debate in miniature. The BITCOIN Act says the point of a reserve is to aggressively accumulate a scarce asset before other nations do. ARMA says the point is to credibly commit to holding what we have for the long term, while staying quiet on aggressive buying to keep moderate lawmakers on board. Begich has said he is coordinating with Lummis to align the two chambers, which means the final shape of any law will likely be a negotiation between “buy a million” and “lock up what we have for 20 years.”
Why the budget-neutral rule is the hidden constraint
The single most important phrase in this entire effort is “budget-neutral,” and it is the reason the reserve has not done more.
Both the executive order and the serious legislative proposals insist that buying Bitcoin cannot cost taxpayers anything. The acquisition has to be funded through means that do not draw on appropriated federal dollars: forfeiture proceeds, penalties, revaluing the Treasury’s gold certificates to market price and using the paper gain, or similar accounting maneuvers. The political logic is obvious. Using public money to buy a volatile asset like Bitcoin would be a lightning rod, and the budget-neutral framing is what lets the administration pursue the reserve without owning the downside if Bitcoin falls.
But budget-neutral is also a serious constraint on scale. Forfeiture proceeds are lumpy and unpredictable. The gold-revaluation idea is clever but politically and operationally complicated. None of these sources can reliably fund the kind of sustained, large-scale buying that a one-million-Bitcoin target would require. So even if a bill passes authorizing purchases, the budget-neutral rule means the actual pace of accumulation could be slow and irregular rather than the steady sovereign bid that Bitcoin bulls imagine. The constraint that makes the reserve politically possible is the same one that limits how much it can actually buy.
This is the tension to watch in whatever emerges this July. A blueprint or bill that authorizes purchases sounds transformative. A blueprint that authorizes purchases only through narrow budget-neutral channels is a much smaller thing in practice, even if the headline reads the same.
How the U.S. compares to other governments
One reason this matters beyond U.S. borders is that several governments already hold significant Bitcoin, mostly through seizure, and the question of who moves first to formalize it is a genuine geopolitical race.
China is estimated to hold roughly 190,000 Bitcoin from various seizures, the largest sovereign stash, though its intentions are opaque and it has no stated reserve policy. The United Kingdom holds approximately 61,000 Bitcoin, also largely from seizures, and has periodically signaled it may sell rather than hold. El Salvador, the outlier, holds around 6,174 Bitcoin acquired deliberately as policy after adopting Bitcoin as legal tender in 2021, making it the clearest example of a government actively accumulating rather than passively holding seized coins.
The U.S. position is distinctive because it is the only major power that has formally committed, by executive order, not to sell its seized Bitcoin and has a serious legislative effort to start buying. If the BITCOIN Act or a version of it passes, the U.S. would leapfrog from “holds seized coins like everyone else” to “first major sovereign to actively accumulate as policy.” That first-mover status is the strategic argument Lummis and the bulls make: in a world where Bitcoin’s supply is fixed at 21 million, the nation that builds a real reserve first locks in an advantage that latecomers cannot easily replicate. Whether that argument moves enough moderate lawmakers to authorize actual purchases is the open question July may begin to answer.
What to realistically expect
Setting the hype aside, here is the honest range of what July and the months around it are likely to deliver.
The most probable near-term outcome is incremental, not transformative. Expect further clarity on the size and custody of existing holdings as the government “gets its house in order,” and continued legislative movement on the BITCOIN Act and ARMA without immediate passage. A formal blueprint refining how the reserve is administered, audited, and reported is plausible. Actual large-scale buying is the least likely near-term outcome, both because the legislation has not passed and because the budget-neutral constraint limits the pace even if it does.
The realistic bull scenario is that one of the bills, probably a negotiated blend of the BITCOIN Act’s accumulation ambition and ARMA’s bipartisan lockup framing, advances far enough that a first official purchase in Q4 2026 becomes credible. That would be genuinely historic, the first major sovereign actively buying Bitcoin as a reserve asset, even if the initial amounts are modest.
The realistic bear scenario is that the reserve stays what it is today: a rebranding of seized coins with a promise not to sell, dressed in “digital Fort Knox” language but never authorized to actually accumulate. In that case July’s blueprint is another policy document that sets direction without creating the legal machinery, and the “pig in lipstick” critique holds.
For Bitcoin holders watching this, the thing to track is narrow and specific: not the rhetoric, but whether Congress actually grants purchase authority and through what funding mechanism. A reserve that can buy is a structural new source of demand for a fixed-supply asset. A reserve that can only hold is a symbolic gesture with no market impact beyond the signaling. July will move the story forward. Whether it moves it to the point that matters, real purchase authority through a workable funding channel, is the only milestone worth watching for.
This article is for informational purposes and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Cryptocurrency markets are highly volatile. The figures and analysis described reflect data available as of June 2, 2026. Always do your own research and consult with qualified financial professionals before making investment decisions.
On May 29, 2026, at 4:00 p.m. Central Time, CME Group flipped the switch. The world’s largest regulated derivatives exchange now trades Bitcoin and Ethereum futures and options around the clock, seven days a week, with only a short maintenance pause.
Summary
- CME Group now offers near-24/7 trading for crypto futures and options, with only short maintenance pauses.
- The shift covers nine assets, including Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, XRP, Cardano, Chainlink, Stellar, Avalanche, and Sui.
- Continuous trading effectively ends the recurring weekend CME gap that shaped years of Bitcoin technical analysis.
- The change is a major institutional milestone, but weekend liquidity may remain thin until volume builds.
The change covers nine crypto assets: Bitcoin, Ethereum, Solana, XRP, Cardano, Chainlink, Stellar, Avalanche, and Sui. The first weekend saw more than 7,200 contracts traded. It sounds like a dry piece of market plumbing, and in one sense it is.
But it quietly kills one of the most-watched quirks in all of crypto trading, the “CME gap,” and it marks a real milestone in how thoroughly traditional finance has absorbed digital assets. This piece explains what changed, why institutions pushed for it, what it does to the famous weekend gap, and the catch that most of the celebratory coverage is leaving out.
What actually changed
For years, CME’s crypto futures ran on traditional-market time. Trading opened Sunday evening and closed Friday afternoon, with the market shut for roughly 48 hours every weekend. That made sense for the exchange that has historically traded corn, oil, and interest-rate futures. It made much less sense for an asset class that never stops.
As of May 29, 2026, that closure is gone. CME crypto futures and options now trade nearly 24 hours a day, seven days a week, on its Globex electronic platform. The only interruptions are a two-minute maintenance window on weekdays between 4:00 and 4:02 p.m. Central Time, and a longer two-hour window on weekends. Continuous trading kicked off at 4:00 p.m. Central, which is 10:00 a.m. UTC. As close to always-on as a regulated exchange realistically gets.
The product roster is broad. Bitcoin futures, which CME first launched in December 2017, and Ether futures, added in 2021, anchor the lineup. Around them sit futures on Solana, XRP, Cardano, Chainlink, Stellar, Avalanche, and Sui. All of them now fall under the 24/7 umbrella, giving institutional traders continuous access to a diversified crypto derivatives portfolio on a single regulated venue. CME also rolled out Bitcoin Volatility futures, a product that lets traders position on Bitcoin’s volatility itself, available 24/7 from June 1.
The early demand was real. CME reported more than 7,200 contracts traded during the first weekend of continuous operation. Average daily volumes for crypto futures in early 2026 were already up 46 percent year-over-year, reaching around 407,200 contracts, with open interest near 335,400 contracts at launch. The weekend trading is not a token gesture. There is genuine appetite for it.
Why institutions pushed for this
The argument behind the change is simple and entirely about risk management.
A hedge fund, corporate treasury desk, or asset manager running a Bitcoin position has a problem if the main regulated futures venue closes for 48 hours every weekend. Bitcoin does not stop trading on Saturday. Spot markets and offshore venues keep moving, sometimes violently, on weekend news. But the institution holding a regulated hedge through CME could not adjust that hedge until Sunday evening. For two days every week, carefully managed exposure sat frozen while the underlying asset kept moving.
That gap between when risk happens and when you can hedge it is exactly what professional risk managers are paid to eliminate. Tim McCourt, CME’s Global Head of Equities, FX and Alternative Products, framed it directly, saying client demand for round-the-clock risk management had reached an all-time high and that always-on regulated markets let clients trade with confidence at any time. The institutional translation: we have clients with real money at risk who could not sleep on Friday night, and they asked us to fix it.
The ecosystem moved with CME. Robinhood’s futures chief called it the first time its users could trade regulated futures at any hour of any day. Ripple Prime, positioning itself as a futures commission merchant built for always-on markets, signed on. Wedbush, which had already been serving clients on a 24/7 basis, expanded its support. The point is that this was not CME acting alone. It was a coordinated move by the brokers and clearing firms that route institutional money into crypto derivatives, which tells you the demand was coming from their clients, not from the exchange looking for a headline.
The death of the CME gap
The most interesting casualty of this change is a piece of crypto trading folklore: the CME gap.
Here is how it worked. Because CME closed Friday afternoon and reopened Sunday evening, Bitcoin’s spot price would drift over the weekend while CME futures sat frozen at Friday’s closing level. When futures reopened Sunday night, the chart showed a “gap” between Friday’s close and Sunday’s open, wherever spot had wandered to in between. These gaps became a fixture of Bitcoin technical analysis. Traders watched them obsessively, because Bitcoin’s price had a well-documented tendency to later return and “fill” the gap, snapping back to that abandoned price level.
The gap became both a technical indicator and a speculative strategy. Traders would position around gap fills, betting the price would return to close them. Thin weekend liquidity made the whole thing worse, because low-volume weekend order books exaggerated moves that would frequently reverse once institutional participants logged back on late Sunday. The 11:00 p.m. UTC Sunday reopen was a recurring moment of volatility as futures recalibrated to wherever spot had gone, much of it low-volume noise rather than real price discovery.
With continuous trading, that structural quirk is, for practical purposes, extinct. There is no Friday close to gap away from and no Sunday reopen to snap back. One of the most reliably exploited inefficiencies in crypto markets just disappeared. For chart analysts who built strategies around gap fills, a tool they relied on for years is gone. For the market as a whole, it removes a recurring source of artificial weekend volatility that had little to do with fundamentals.
Why it matters beyond the gap
Strip away the trading folklore and the deeper significance is about market maturity.
Every step CME has taken in crypto, from the first Bitcoin futures in 2017 through the addition of Ether, Solana, and the rest, has been a marker of how seriously traditional finance takes the asset class. The 24/7 move is the next one. It signals that crypto derivatives have enough institutional volume and demand to justify the operational cost of running a regulated market around the clock, which is not trivial. Exchanges do not staff weekend operations and rebuild clearing schedules for an asset they consider a sideshow.
It also narrows the structural gap between regulated venues and crypto-native ones. For years, the knock on regulated crypto derivatives was that they operated on banker’s hours while the real action happened 24/7 on offshore perpetual-futures exchanges. That divide pushed a lot of volume to less-regulated venues simply because those were the only places open when the market moved. By going continuous, CME removes one of the main reasons institutional traders had to step outside the regulated system to manage weekend risk. It brings activity that had leaked offshore back toward a venue with US oversight and clearing guarantees.
There is a longer-arc reading too. The shift quietly admits that crypto’s always-on model won the argument. Traditional markets close because the institutions trading them are human and need the weekend. Crypto never adopted that convention, and rather than force crypto to conform, the largest traditional derivatives exchange reshaped itself around crypto’s clock. That is a small but telling reversal of who is adapting to whom.
The catch the press releases skip
Here is the part that the celebratory coverage tends to leave out: the structural gap is gone, but the liquidity is not evenly there yet.
Eliminating the weekend closure does not automatically create deep weekend markets. In the early going, liquidity on CME’s crypto products remains concentrated where it always was, during peak weekday hours and in the most-traded contracts. Weekend order books may stay thin for a while, which means volume and genuine price discovery will still cluster on weekdays even though the market is technically open all weekend. You can now trade Saturday, but you may not find a deep market to trade into.
The broader liquidity reality complicates the story further. Even with the change, the deepest pools of crypto derivatives liquidity sit elsewhere. IBIT options open interest, tied to BlackRock’s spot Bitcoin ETF, far exceeds CME’s crypto options markets, and offshore perpetual-futures venues still dominate raw volume. CME going 24/7 removes a structural inefficiency, but it does not instantly make CME the deepest place to trade crypto on a Saturday. That will depend on whether the weekend volume builds over time or stays a thin afterthought to the weekday session.
And the back office still runs on traditional time. Any trade executed over a weekend or holiday gets assigned the next business day’s date for clearing and settlement. You can trade on Saturday, but the paperwork pretends it happened Monday. It is a practical accommodation that lets CME extend trading hours without rebuilding its entire clearing infrastructure, but it is a reminder that the plumbing of traditional finance has not gone fully continuous even as the trading screen has.
None of this undercuts the significance of the change. It just means the honest version is “CME removed the weekend closure and the famous gap, and weekend liquidity will build from here,” not “CME weekends are now as deep as weekdays.” The structure changed instantly. The liquidity follows on its own schedule.
Where this leaves the market
CME going 24/7 is one of those changes that looks like plumbing and turns out to matter more than it first appears.
The immediate effects are concrete. The weekend closure is gone, the CME gap that shaped years of Bitcoin technical analysis is effectively extinct, and institutional traders can now hedge regulated crypto positions at any hour instead of sitting frozen through every weekend. The first-weekend volume and the 46 percent year-over-year growth in crypto futures activity show the demand was real, not theoretical.
The significance is mostly structural. This is another marker of crypto’s absorption into mainstream finance, a step that narrows the divide between regulated and crypto-native venues and pulls some weekend risk management back toward a US-overseen platform. It also quietly confirms that crypto’s always-on model reshaped the largest traditional derivatives exchange rather than the other way around.
The caveat is liquidity. A market being open is not the same as a market being deep. Weekend trading on CME will start thin and build only if the volume actually shows up, and the deepest crypto derivatives liquidity still sits in ETF options and offshore perpetuals rather than on CME. The structural change happened on May 29. Whether it becomes a genuinely active weekend market or stays a technically-open but lightly-used window is the thing to watch over the coming months. Either way, the era of the Bitcoin weekend gap is over, and that alone makes this a date worth remembering in the slow institutionalization of crypto.
This article is for informational purposes and does not constitute financial or investment advice. Cryptocurrency markets are highly volatile. The figures and analysis described reflect data available as of June 2, 2026. Always do your own research and consult with qualified financial professionals before making investment decisions.
TLDR
- Peter Schiff warned that Bitcoin could fall below $20,000 if it breaks the $50,000 level.
- He said excessive complacency suggests the market is not near a bottom.
- Schiff argued that a sharp drop could push long-term holders to exit positions.
- Strategy sold 32 BTC to fund preferred dividends while holding over 843,000 BTC.
- CryptoQuant reported that monthly Bitcoin demand has contracted by 232,000 BTC.
Bitcoin traded near $67,000 after a 4% daily drop and a 16% monthly decline. Peter Schiff warned that a break below $50,000 could trigger a slide under $20,000. He argued that complacency, not volatility, threatens market stability.
Bitcoin Price Outlook Faces $20K Breakdown Risk
Schiff posted on X that investor sentiment shows excessive calm despite recent losses. He wrote, “There’s way too much complacency in Bitcoin for the market to be anywhere near a bottom.” He added that once Bitcoin breaks $50K, it should fall quickly below $20K. He said that such a move would pressure long-term holders to exit positions. He claimed many investors would “finally throw in the towel” after a sharp breakdown.
Earlier, Schiff questioned whether a Bitcoin crash would drag broader risk assets lower. He suggested that either outcome could redirect capital toward “value and safety.” For years, he has supported gold as a hedge during market stress. He repeated that stance while discussing current price conditions.
Schiff also targeted Strategy’s STRC preferred stock during his commentary. STRC traded below $96, pushing its yield near 12% at the time. He argued that doubts about dividend payments could drive the price lower. He described a potential need to raise the coupon as a “death spiral.”
Strategy recently sold 32 BTC for $2.5 million to fund preferred dividends. The company still holds over 843,000 BTC on its balance sheet. Schiff suggested that the preferred structure remains fragile despite the large holdings.
Market Reaction Splits as Analysts Cite Demand Contraction
Crypto commentator Alex Marzell dismissed Schiff’s outlook on social media. He said that a move to $20K would only test his available cash. Meanwhile, Bitget CEO Gracey Chen said she plans to buy nearly $50,000. She stated that global money printing could support commodities, including Bitcoin and gold.
Chen also flagged short-term risks affecting the Bitcoin price. She cited CPI pressure, potential rate hikes, and selling by large holders. She mentioned possible sales from Strategy and Mt. Gox creditors. She also said heavy AI-related IPOs could drain market liquidity.
CryptoQuant research head Julio Moreno reported contracting Bitcoin demand. He said monthly demand has fallen by 232,000 BTC. He stated that weakening demand, not macro factors, drives the correction.
Bitfinex published a report describing a “slow bleed” phase. The report linked price weakness to distribution and fading conviction. Moreno’s assessment aligned with that view on demand contraction.
Federal investigators have opened a probe into former U.S. Representative George Santos after suspicious prediction market trades allegedly generated tens of thousands of dollars around President Donald Trump’s February State of the Union address.
Summary
- DOJ and CFTC have opened an investigation after Kalshi flagged suspicious trades linked to former Congressman George Santos.
- NPR reported that Santos allegedly made tens of thousands of dollars betting he would miss President Trump’s State of the Union address.
- The case adds to growing scrutiny of insider trading risks on prediction market platforms such as Kalshi and Polymarket.
NPR reported that the Department of Justice and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission are investigating Santos after prediction market platform Kalshi detected unusual trading activity linked to a contract on whether he would attend the speech. According to NPR, Kalshi froze Santos’ account and referred the matter to regulators after reviewing the trades.
Based on NPR’s reporting, Santos allegedly wagered that he would not attend the event despite posting a video on X indicating that he planned to be present in the gallery. As President Trump delivered his address, Santos posted from an airport, after which the market’s odds on his attendance dropped sharply, NPR said.
People familiar with the matter told NPR that Kalshi has sought to interview Santos as part of its internal investigation. The report added that Santos has not participated in those interview requests.
When contacted by the outlet, Santos responded, “Well, that’s news to me.”
Kalshi’s enforcement efforts face new test
Coming months after Kalshi disciplined political candidates for trading on their own races, the Santos case places renewed attention on how prediction markets police participants who may possess direct knowledge of an event’s outcome.
Back in April, Kalshi suspended three federal candidates after an internal review found they had placed bets on their own election contests. Kalshi’s head of enforcement, Robert DeNault, said at the time that candidates capable of influencing market outcomes violated exchange rules regardless of the size of their trades.
Those earlier cases resulted in exchange penalties but did not lead to referrals to the DOJ or the CFTC. NPR’s reporting suggests the Santos matter followed a different path, with Kalshi freezing the account and escalating the issue to regulators.
Kalshi has recently expanded measures intended to prevent market abuse. The company said it introduced screening tools designed to stop users from trading on events in which they are directly involved.
Prediction markets draw growing insider trading scrutiny
Attention from regulators has increased as several high-profile cases have raised questions about the use of nonpublic information in event-based contracts.
In April, federal prosecutors charged a U.S. Army Special Forces soldier with making roughly $409,881 from Polymarket bets tied to the capture of Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro. Authorities alleged the trader possessed advance knowledge connected to the operation.
More recently, the DOJ and the CFTC charged Google software engineer Michele Spagnuolo with insider trading tied to prediction markets. Prosecutors alleged that Spagnuolo used confidential Google search ranking data to place $2.7 million in bets on Polymarket, generating approximately $1.2 million in profit before the information became public.
CFTC Enforcement Director David Miller said in May that insider trading laws apply to prediction markets and rejected arguments that event contracts exist outside existing market abuse rules.
Congress has also stepped up oversight. In May, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman James Comer launched an inquiry into insider trading safeguards at Kalshi and Polymarket, seeking information about monitoring systems and enforcement practices.
As scrutiny has intensified, both Kalshi and Polymarket have introduced additional compliance measures.
Kalshi has focused on identifying participants with direct involvement in market events, while Polymarket has revised its rules, expanded surveillance programs, and hired blockchain analytics firm Chainalysis to support investigations into insider trading and market manipulation.
The crypto market fell nearly 7% in 24 hours into June 3, with Bitcoin briefly breaking below $66,000 and around $1.8 billion in positions wiped out.
The drop looked sudden, but the on-chain data had been flashing for days. Leverage sat at October-crash levels, funding ran hot, and a rare Strategy Bitcoin sale was the spark.
The Leverage Was Already at October-Crash Levels
Before the drop, the derivatives market was stretched. Bitcoin’s futures open interest leverage ratio, a gauge of how much borrowed money sits in the futures market relative to Bitcoin’s size, climbed to 2.63% on June 2. The perpetual version reached 2.48%. Both were the highest readings since October 6, 2025.
That date matters. It fell days before the October 10 Black Friday crash, when the same ratio peaked near 2.73%. A high reading means traders had piled into leveraged positions after a steady rally, leaving the market fragile.
Want more token insights like this? Sign up for Editor Harsh Notariya’s Daily Crypto Newsletter here.
Funding rates showed which side. The rate across all exchanges, the periodic fee that long traders pay shorts on perpetual futures, rose to about 0.018 on June 2, the most positive single-day reading since early September.
Because positive funding means longs pay to hold their bets, the spike confirms the leverage had crowded onto the long side. Notably, the funding bias was already high on June 1, at 0.017, the day when the market got its major bearish catalyst.
A Key BTC Sale Broke the Mood, Led to the Crypto Crash
The spark came on June 1. Strategy, the corporate Bitcoin holder led by Michael Saylor, disclosed a rare Bitcoin sale, its first in years. For a firm known only for buying, the reversal hit sentiment hard.
Analytics firm Santiment reported that social sentiment flipped into extreme fear, with traders blaming the Strategy sale as a main trigger.
With the market already leaning long and over-leveraged, that shock was enough to start the unwind.
BTC Spot Selling Ran Hotter Than October
The selling was not only in derivatives. Spot Bitcoin moving onto exchanges, often a precursor to selling, spiked on June 2. Total exchange inflows reached about 58,617 BTC, the highest since April 14. June 1 hit the sentiment hard and June 2 saw exchange-specific inflows as a result.
That figure carries weight against the October comparison. On October 7, 2025, just before the Black Friday crash, inflows peaked near 46,527 BTC. June 2 ran higher, so spot selling pressure was heavier this time than ahead of the October wipeout.
Crowded long leverage and real coins hitting exchanges together set off the crypto crash cascade.
Whales Sold, and It Was a Bitcoin Problem
The selling traced to large holders. Santiment data showed wallets holding between 10 and 10,000 BTC, the whales and sharks, offloaded 24,602 BTC over the past week, an 18% cut. The smallest traders, holding under 0.01 BTC, added just 61 coins, far too little to cushion the fall.
The cause sat with Bitcoin itself. CryptoQuant’s head of research, Julio Moreno, noted that Bitcoin demand was contracting at about 232,000 BTC a month, and argued the correction tied to demand rather than stocks, oil, or macro. US equities, by contrast, sat at record highs.
Because Bitcoin still commands about 58.4% of the total crypto market, its share of all crypto value, per CoinGecko, its slide dragged the rest of the market down with it, resulting in this sudden crypto crash.
For now, the data that flagged the drop is the data to watch. Whether leverage resets or builds back up, and whether Bitcoin demand steadies, will shape how the market moves over the next few days.
The post It Was All There: High Leverage and a Rare BTC Sale Behind the June Crypto Crash appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Global payments giant Mastercard has taken another major step toward integrating blockchain into traditional finance. It announced broader settlement capabilities that now include several stablecoins, such as Ripple’s RLUSD, Circle’s USDC, Paxos-issued PYUSD, USDG, and USDP, and SoFi’s SoFiUSD.
The crypto assets linked to the US dollar will be enabled across a wide range of supported networks, such as XRPL, Solana, Ethereum, Arbitrum, and Base.
To Settle Transactions in Stablecoins
The announcement from the TradFi behemoth reveals that the company is expanding its infrastructure to allow merchants and partners to settle transactions using the aforementioned assets. This is considered a significant evolution from pilot programs into more practical, real-world applications.
The firm has been building out its crypto strategy through its Multi-Token Network (MTN), designed to bridge traditional finance and digital assets. Most recently, it outlined a new collaboration that included some industry giants such as Binance, Ripple, and even PayPal.
Its stablecoin initiatives saw a major push in March when Mastercard announced the acquisition of such a payments firm called BVNK for $1.8 billion.
RLUSD has drawn particular attention due to Ripple’s strong presence in cross-border payments. However, Mastercard’s announcement encompasses a wider range of established stablecoins, including USDC and PYUSD.
Both are already gaining traction in institutional and payments use cases, and Mastercard is attempting to position itself as a neutral infrastructure layer rather than backing a single issuer.
Stablecoins’ Growth
The company’s latest move on the stablecoin scene comes as demand quickly grows for faster and cheaper cross-border transactions. These assets are increasingly viewed as a viable alternative to legacy correspondent-backing systems, offering near-instant settlement and lower costs.
Mastercard’s decision to expand support signals rising confidence in their long-term role within the global financial system. In addition, the firm emphasized its commitment to regulatory compliance, security, and interoperability, which are all key requirements for institutional adoption.
“The next phase of stablecoin adoption is about real-world utility, especially in settlement, where timing and liquidity matter most. By introducing intraday and weekend on settlement options across our global network, we’re expanding how partners manage liquidity and operate in an always-on digital economy while maintaining the trust, resilience and safeguards they expect from Mastercard,” commented Raj Dhamodharan, executive vice president, Blockchain & Digital Assets at Mastercard.
The post Ripple’s RLUSD in Focus as Mastercard Expands Stablecoin Strategy appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Zcash Foundation released Zebra 4.5.3 and Zebra 5.0.0 after engineers found and fixed a critical soundness bug in the Orchard Action circuit.
Summary
- Zcash Foundation fixed an Orchard circuit bug before known exploitation and urged urgent Zebra upgrades.
- Zebra 4.5.3 disabled Orchard actions, while 5.0.0 re-enabled them through NU6.2 at mainnet height 3,364,600.
- Zcash said no unauthorized value appeared, and Sapling plus transparent transactions kept working normally during incident.
The foundation said Zebra 4.5.3 activated an emergency soft fork at mainnet block height 3,363,426. The release temporarily rejected transactions and blocks containing Orchard actions while engineers prepared a corrected circuit.
The soft fork went live at about 02:00 UTC on June 2 after an earlier coordination attempt faced patch deployment issues. The foundation said private coordination with miners and exchanges started on May 31 to reduce the chance of exploitation before public disclosure.
NU6.2 restores shielded transactions
Zebra 5.0.0 activated the NU6.2 hard fork at mainnet block height 3,364,600. The upgrade re-enabled Orchard actions with a corrected circuit and routed Orchard proofs to a new per-circuit verifying key. The release also marked the second security-driven protocol upgrade in Zcash history since 2016.
A hard fork was needed because a zero-knowledge proof circuit fix requires a new pinned verifying key.
“We strongly urge all node operators to upgrade to Zebra 5.0.0 as soon as possible,” Zcash Foundation said.
No known exploit found
The bug was discovered on May 29 by independent security researcher Taylor Hornby during a protocol audit for Shielded Labs. ZODL engineers Daira-Emma Hopwood, Kris Nuttycombe and Jack Grigg confirmed the issue within hours and began work on a fix.
The foundation said the flaw could have allowed invalid state changes inside Orchard and possible double spending within that pool. It also said Zcash’s turnstile mechanism protected total ZEC supply, and “There is no evidence of unauthorized value creation.” The affected code included older halo2_gadgets, orchard and zcash_primitives releases, plus zcashd versions 5.0.0 through 6.12.3.
Why Orchard remains important
Orchard is Zcash’s newest shielded pool and a core part of its privacy system. It launched with NU5 in 2022 and uses Halo 2, which removed the need for a trusted setup. That design made Orchard a key part of Zcash’s current privacy roadmap.
Related market coverage has recently focused on rising Zcash shielded use. A recent report said about 30% of ZEC supply had moved into shielded pools, with Orchard holding 4.2 million ZEC and most of the recent growth.
The foundation said user privacy was not harmed during the incident. Sapling and transparent transactions also continued operating normally while Orchard actions remained paused.
Node operators now face the main task of upgrading to Zebra 5.0.0, rather than relying on older releases. Operators that stayed on an incorrect fork after NU6.2 may need to resync from scratch or restore from a backup made before activation.
The UK Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) warned Premier League clubs that sponsorship deals with unauthorized crypto firms could expose them to legal liability, money laundering risks, and reputational damage.
The regulator’s warning, which raises concerns about existing partnerships, arrives 8 days before the 2026 World Cup, a window of peak global football attention.
Crypto Sponsorship Money Floods Football Before World Cup
Crypto firms spent a record £130 million ($170 million) on Premier League sponsorships last season, according to Bloomberg. Fourteen of 20 clubs carried crypto or blockchain partners, up from eight a year earlier.
Manchester City led commercial earners, generating €408 million ($474M) in 2025, ahead of its broadcast income. The influx filled gaps left by tighter gambling rules, fueling crypto deals across clubs.
The 2026 World Cup begins June 11 in Mexico City, per FIFA. The tournament magnifies sponsor visibility, raising the stakes for clubs whose partners reach millions of international fans.
FCA Targets Unauthorised Crypto Sponsors
The FCA said some unauthorized firms may breach financial promotion rules by using club branding to reach fans. It has contacted clubs where it identified concerns and signaled enforcement where needed.
“Millions of football fans trust their club’s badge. Clubs should not let unauthorized financial firms exploit that loyalty by putting potentially dodgy products in front of millions of fans,” Reuters reported, citing Lucy Castledine, FCA director of consumer investments.
Follow us on X to get the latest news as it happens
Sports minister Stephanie Peacock said sponsorship income matters, but fans deserve partners that are accountable and safe.
Several deals sit under scrutiny, including the Manchester City sleeve partner. The regulator pointed to UK crypto marketing rules that require authorized promotions for consumers.
Fans Face Total Loss
Fans using unregulated firms risk losing all their money and lack access to compensation schemes, the FCA said.
Unlike authorised providers, these firms fall outside the Financial Ombudsman and compensation cover.
A logo signals payment, not a safety endorsement.
The watchdog already maintains an FCA warning list that firms can check. Broader crypto sports sponsorship growth suggests the tension between revenue and protection will persist.
With FIFA World Cup 2026 kickoff days away, the coming weeks may reveal whether teams trim partnerships or defend the cash they have come to rely on.
Subscribe to our YouTube channel to watch leaders and journalists provide expert insights
The post FCA Warns on Crypto Sponsorship Risks 8 Days Before FIFA World Cup 2026 appeared first on BeInCrypto.
Key Highlights
- GameStop stock jumped approximately 9–12% following announcement of historic Q1 net income, 14% revenue increase, and $2B buyback authorization
- Marvell Technology climbed more than 16%, continuing Tuesday’s remarkable 33% gain after Nvidia’s Jensen Huang hinted at potential $1 trillion market cap
- Intel stock advanced 6% as company executives highlighted robust data center CPU orders and rapidly scaling 18A chip manufacturing
- GitLab declined 6% following workforce reduction announcement impacting 14% of employees and withdrawal from 22 markets
- S&P 500 futures edged lower amid Middle East missile activity that reignited geopolitical worries and elevated crude prices
GameStop delivered what many consider its most impressive quarterly performance in years, reporting record-breaking Q1 financial results. The retailer achieved 14% revenue expansion, surpassed analyst projections for earnings per share, and maintained a formidable balance sheet with $9.7 billion in cash and equivalent holdings.
Management announced authorization for a substantial $2 billion stock repurchase initiative extending through July 2029. Pre-market and early session trading witnessed share prices rising between 9% and 12%.
Chairman Ryan Cohen continues capturing market attention through his aggressive pursuit of eBay via a proposed $56 billion acquisition. While eBay’s leadership has turned down the approach, Cohen has signaled readiness for a proxy battle and outlined plans to leverage GameStop’s physical store network to enhance eBay’s e-commerce platform.
Marvell’s AI Momentum Continues Building
Marvell Technology maintained its extraordinary market surge, tacking on another 16% Wednesday after Tuesday’s spectacular 33% leap. The momentum traces back to remarks from Nvidia’s CEO Jensen Huang, who floated the possibility of Marvell becoming the next technology company achieving a $1 trillion valuation.
Market enthusiasm has focused heavily on Marvell’s Teralynx T100 networking processor, engineered specifically for AI-focused data center deployments. Industry observers view the company as a critical provider of AI infrastructure components, particularly customized semiconductor offerings.
Intel similarly posted gains of approximately 6% after CFO David Zinsner highlighted exceptional demand patterns for data center processors. He characterized the company’s 18A chip as experiencing the fastest production ramp-up the company has witnessed in no less than five years, projecting that CPU demand could accelerate dramatically as artificial intelligence workloads proliferate.
Zinsner referenced transformation initiatives spearheaded by CEO Lip-Bu Tan, which include condensing management hierarchy from 12 levels to 6 and trimming total headcount beneath 80,000 personnel.
GitLab and Palo Alto Experience Declines
GitLab shares retreated approximately 6% following disclosure of a corporate reorganization eliminating roughly 14% of its employee base globally. The software development platform additionally announced plans to cease operations in 22 nations, contracting its international footprint by approximately 37%.
GitLab projects pre-tax restructuring expenses between $30 million and $35 million, with the majority concentrated in the second fiscal quarter of 2027.
Palo Alto Networks declined roughly 4% despite delivering impressive quarterly results. The cybersecurity leader exceeded expectations with adjusted earnings of $0.85 per share and posted revenue reaching $3 billion, representing 31% year-over-year growth.
Next-Generation Security Annual Recurring Revenue surged 60% to $8.1 billion. The selloff occurred even as management elevated full-year projections across all major financial categories.
Broader equity markets faced modest headwinds. S&P 500 futures retreated 0.08% as fresh missile attacks in the Middle East heightened anxieties about a faltering U.S.-Iran diplomatic agreement, driving crude oil quotations upward.
Bitcoin registered marginal gains, changing hands around $67,250. Gold futures slipped 0.65%, while the 10-year Treasury yield climbed to 4.483%.
Bitcoin (BTC) overnight fell all the way back to $65,300, but has since bounced back to the $67,000 area shortly before the open of U.S. stocks.
A check of the charts shows this is the third time bitcoin has dropped to the mid-$60,000 range since its panicky February 6 bottom.
The previous two “re-tests” of that February 6 bottom — February 24 and March 29 — worked out for the bulls, with prices quickly recovering back above $70,000 and eventually to $83,000 by mid-May.
What happens on this third occasion remains to be seen.
U.S. stock index futures are little changed after another round of record highs on Tuesday. The price of oil and bond yields are both modestly higher.
The UK’s financial watchdog has warned Premier League Football clubs that they could be exposed to potential money laundering violations if they continue to partner with unauthorised crypto firms.
The Financial Conduct Authority (FCA) today warned all UK football clubs, while noting that it was mainly writing to clubs in the country’s top division signing sponsorship deals with unregistered financial firms.
It claimed, “These unauthorised firms may be breaching UK financial services laws by providing financial services in the UK without authorisation. Fans using these firms risk losing all their money.”
Among the clubs engaged in sponsorships with unauthorised crypto firms are Manchester City, which is partnered with Socios, OKX, and Axi.
Chelsea, meanwhile, is partnered with crypto exchange BingX while Newcastle United is partnered with VT Markets, a crypto firm currently on the FCA’s warning list.
Read more: CHART: Every crypto sponsor for the 2025/26 Champions League
One firm that is registered with the FCA is Arsenal sponsor Bitpanda.
The FCA didn’t reveal which clubs it wrote to. Regardless, clubs received a letter asking them to carry out five due diligence checks:
- Confirm whether or not the firm is FCA authorised or relies on an exemption.
- Check whether the firm’s services are regulated under UK law.
- Assess the restrictions a firm may have to prevent UK customers from accessing its services.
- Check the FCA’s warning lists and firm checker to see if the firm is authorised or not.
- If necessary, use specialist legal advice to confirm a firm’s regulatory position.
Beyond its criticisms of football clubs, the watchdog warned football fans, “It doesn’t matter how prominent the branding is, which club it sponsors, or how professional the app looks. If the sponsoring firm provides financial services and is not on the FCA Firm Checker, it is not regulated, and you will likely have no protection if things go wrong.”
Read more: Football legends Ronaldinho, Luis Figo sued for Omegapro crypto scam promo
During the 2025/2026 Premier League season, 13 teams repped sponsors from 13 different crypto firms. In the prior season, 14 teams entered into partnerships with 15 different firms.
Protos has reached out to Manchester City and Chelsea for comment and will update this piece should we hear anything back.
Got a tip? Send us an email securely via Protos Leaks. For more informed news and investigations, follow us on X, Bluesky, and Google News, or subscribe to our YouTube channel.
G Money – Sabiduria Ft @TrampaBillone (Video Official)
Lloyds Bank and Halifax down live: App outage means thousands ‘can’t pay bills’
CLPS stock rises on AI-powered R&D restructuring plan
-
Tech5 days agoWaymo dominates autonomous vehicle registrations as Tesla trails behind
-
News Videos5 days agoThis is BROKEN! INSANE 5x MONEY CAR WASH WEEK! The NEW GTA Online UPDATE Today! (GTA5 New Update)
-
Tech4 days agoSpaceX just won a second Golden Dome contract. This one is $4.16 billion.
-
News Videos5 days agoSHE IS KILLING XRP!!! WATCH URGENT AND ACT FAST
-
Business2 days agoJade Biosciences, Inc. (JBIO) Discusses Positive Interim Results From JADE101 Phase I Healthy Volunteer Study and Development Plans Transcript
-
NewsBeat5 days agoFIRST NIGHT REVIEW: Take That bring the Circus back to life in spectacular sun-soaked style
-
Crypto World5 days ago
CFTC Has Approved the First Regulated Bitcoin Perpetual Contract in the U.S.
-
Business4 days agoIs the Spurs Phenom Already Better Than Prime Diesel?
-
NewsBeat5 days agoNovak Djokovic v Joao Fonseca LIVE: French Open latest scores and results after Jannik Sinner’s shocking collapse
-
Crypto World5 days agoSnowflake (SNOW) Stock Rallies on Strong Q1 Results and AI Product Growth
-
Entertainment5 days agoWeak ‘Supergirl’ Box Office Tracking Amid Milly Alcock Backlash
-
Business4 days agoDemand Conditions Improve In Chemicals Sector In April 2026
-
Crypto World5 days agoMicroStrategy Moves $30 Million in BTC to Coinbase Prime: Is the Bitcoin Sell-Off Already Here?
-
Politics4 days agoThe House | Inside Andy Burnham’s Makerfield Campaign: “Nobody Thinks This Is In The Bag”
-
Entertainment4 days agoOne of the Greatest Sitcoms of All Time Shoots Up Apple TV’s Charts 11 Years Later
-
Tech5 days agoThis Week In Security: Ubiquiti Fixes, And FreeBSD Joins The Club You Don’t Want To Join
-
Entertainment5 days agoMaddox Jolie-Pitt Legally Requests to Drop Brad’s Surname
-
Entertainment4 days agoBritney Spears Shares Troubling Update After Hard Year
-
Crypto World24 hours agoSeagate (STX) Stock Surges to Record High on AI Boom and Legal Settlement
-
Entertainment5 days agoBruce Willis’ Generosity Resurfaces Amid His Dementia
You must be logged in to post a comment Login