Coinbase has raised new concerns over the Senate’s latest stablecoin yield compromise, keeping pressure on a crypto market structure bill that lawmakers still want to move forward. 

Reports on March 26 said the exchange told Senate offices it could not support the new language on yield payments, keeping stablecoin rewards at the center of the debate.

Punchbowl News, as cited by several outlets, reported that Coinbase representatives met Senate lawmakers on Monday and pushed back on the revised draft. The reported concern focused on language that could stop third parties, including exchanges, from paying rewards on stablecoin balances.

That issue matters because stablecoin rewards remain a key product for crypto platforms. Banking groups have argued that exchange-paid rewards could draw deposits away from banks and leave a gap around the GENIUS Act, which already bars issuers from paying yield directly to holders.

Senators Thom Tillis and Angela Alsobrooks have led the latest Senate talks on a compromise. Earlier this month, Alsobrooks said lawmakers should not let perfect block progress and said both crypto firms and banks may leave the process “a little bit unhappy.”

The White House has also tried to bridge the gap. Reuters reported in late January that the administration planned meetings with banking and crypto groups, and later reporting showed the White House held at least a third meeting in February as the sides kept working on stablecoin reward terms.

The latest clash comes after a setback in January. Reuters reported that the Senate Banking Committee postponed work on the bill after Coinbase withdrew support and objected to earlier draft language tied to stablecoin rewards.

Lawmakers still face a tight calendar even though the House already moved first. The House passed the CLARITY Act on July 17, 2025, and the Senate now needs to settle its own version before any final package can move ahead.

Lummis and White House advisers signal talks continue

Senator Cynthia Lummis said on X that “bipartisan compromise is necessary” for the CLARITY Act to pass. She added that lawmakers are working to protect stablecoin rewards while also trying to prevent deposit flight from community banks.

White House digital assets adviser Patrick Witt also tried to calm market worries. He wrote that there was “plenty of uninformed FUD” around the issue, a sign that talks remain active even as Coinbase keeps pressing its case.

Bo Shen has reopened efforts to recover about $42 million in crypto stolen from his personal wallet in 2022. 

The Fenbushi Capital co-founder now offers a bounty to people or groups that help recover the assets, as investigators revisit the case with newer tracing tools and fresh leads.

Bo Shen said he will pay a bounty worth 10% to 20% of any recovered funds. He said the reward will go to any individual or organization that makes a material contribution to the recovery effort.

He also said onchain investigators ZachXBT and Taylor “Tayvano” Monahan have already helped freeze about $1.2 million linked to the stolen assets. Shen said his team will distribute rewards after the recovery process is complete.

The new bounty brings attention back to a case Shen first disclosed in November 2022. At that time, he said attackers drained about $42 million in digital assets from his personal wallet.

Shen said the stolen funds were personal assets and did not affect Fenbushi Capital or related entities. That distinction remains central to the case, as the renewed recovery effort focuses on assets taken from a private wallet rather than company-controlled funds.

Furthermore, blockchain security firm SlowMist later said the theft happened after someone compromised Shen’s mnemonic seed phrase. The firm said the stolen assets included about $38.2 million in USDC, 1,607 Ether, nearly 720,000 USDT, and 4.13 Bitcoin.

According to the case details, the stolen funds later moved through services and exchanges that included ChangeNow and SideShift. These transfers made the recovery effort harder, especially during the early stage of the investigation, when cross-chain tracking tools were still less developed.

New tools give investigators another chance

Shen said tracing tools in 2022 could not fully support a case of this scale and complexity. He said that limit reduced the ability of investigators to follow asset movements across different chains and platforms.

He now says recent progress in artificial intelligence-based analysis and onchain forensics has improved that process. Shen said investigators now have “new leads” and a “clearer picture” of how the funds moved after the hack.

Bitcoin mining margins remain under pressure as lower revenue and higher operating costs narrow the list of viable operators. 

A new CoinShares report says part of the global mining fleet now sits below profitability, with older machines and higher power costs facing the most pressure.

CoinShares said Q4 2025 was the hardest quarter for Bitcoin miners since the April 2024 halving. The firm said lower Bitcoin prices and near-record network hashrate pushed hashprice to five-year lows and lifted the weighted average cash cost to produce one Bitcoin among listed miners to about $79,995 in Q4 2025.

The report said hashprice dropped further to about $29 per PH/s/day in Q1 2026. CoinShares added that current mining economics do not support a broad hardware refresh cycle, as weaker returns continue to pressure balance sheets and daily cash flow across the sector.

CoinShares said the current revenue level makes several machine models unworkable at common power rates. The report stated that any miner running hardware below an S19 XP at electricity costs of 6 cents per kilowatt-hour or more is losing money at a hashprice near $30 per PH/s/day.

The firm estimated that this group accounts for about 15% to 20% of the global Bitcoin mining fleet. That places the current squeeze on operators with older fleets, weaker efficiency, or less favorable power agreements, while larger miners with newer hardware and cheaper energy retain more room to operate.

Moreover, hashrate Index said USD hashprice rose 4.9% in the week to March 23, reaching $33.65 per PH/s/day from $32.08. Even so, the same report said that at about $33 per PH/s/day, hashprice remains at or below breakeven for many miners depending on machine type and operating costs.

The network has already started to reflect that strain. Hashrate Index said Bitcoin’s latest difficulty adjustment on March 20 cut difficulty by 7.76% to 133.79 trillion, reducing the work needed to mine a block and giving some relief to miners that stayed online.

CoinShares sees more stress if Bitcoin stays below key levels

CoinShares head of research James Butterfill said, 

“If prices were to stay below US$80k for the remainder of the year, we forecast the hashprice to continue to fall.” 

He added that in that scenario, “the hashprice would more likely flatline” as miners switch off unprofitable rigs and network hashrate falls.

CoinShares also said higher-cost miners may face more capitulation in the first half of 2026 unless Bitcoin recovers. The report said the sector is moving toward operators with structural advantages, including low-cost power, better machine efficiency, and the ability to shift part of their business toward AI and data center services.

The crypto market fell 2.5% on Friday to $2.45 trillion as hopes of an end to the ongoing U.S. Iran war faded.

According to data from crypto.news, Bitcoin (BTC) price dropped 2.5% on the day to $69,445 at the time of writing as bulls failed to defend the $70,000 psychological support. Ethereum (ETH) was hit harder, falling 4.4% to $2,080, while other major altcoins such as BNB (BNB), XRP (XRP), Solana (SOL), and Dogecoin (DOGE) saw losses ranging between 3% and 5%, respectively.

As crypto prices fell, it triggered a massive unwinding of bullish long positions from traders in the crypto derivatives markets. Data from CoinGlass shows that over $193 million in long positions were liquidated from the crypto market in the past 24 hours. Out of this, Bitcoin accounted for $48.93 million while Ethereum saw $75.93 million in long liquidations.

Liquidations occur when a trader’s margin account can no longer support their open positions due to significant price moves. When longs get liquidated, they are forced to sell their assets, which creates further downside pressure on prices.

The crypto market downturn began after Iranian state media reported that Iranian officials had rejected a U.S. proposal to end the ongoing conflict between the two nations in the Middle East. This sparked uncertainty and deteriorated investor appetite for risk assets.

Asian tech stocks such as Japan’s Nikkei 225, Hong Kong’s Hang Seng, and South Korea’s KOSPI dipped lower on Friday shortly after the news broke. Even gold, touted as a safe haven asset amid times of economic stress, also fell 2.9% over the day to under $4,500. Silver fell 6% to $68.

Meanwhile, crude oil prices regained strength as the Strait of Hormuz remained closed for the fourth consecutive day. WTI crude futures rose 3.3% above $93 per barrel on Friday, while Brent oil rose 3.7% to above $106.

The closure of the key maritime bottleneck has severely disrupted global oil flows, resulting in the loss of millions of barrels of daily supply. This has sparked concerns of surging inflation and a supply chain crisis that could ultimately further push back hopes for Federal Reserve rate cuts this year.

According to the CME Group FedWatch tool, the odds of the Federal Reserve holding interest rates steady at 3.5% to 3.75% remain at 93.8%, while 6.5% expect a 25 basis point rate hike.

Risk assets, including cryptocurrencies, have often rallied when liquidity is high, or the market expects a rate cut, and typically decline when the central bank maintains a hawkish stance on monetary policy.

Circle has reversed part of its recent USDC enforcement action after one of the 16 frozen wallets regained access to funds. 

The move has shifted attention from the initial freeze to Circle’s review process, as public questions continue over how the company handled the case.

On-chain investigator ZachXBT said Circle unfroze the wallet address “0x61f…e543,” which he linked to Goated.com. Data cited in current reporting showed the wallet held about 130,966 USDC after access was restored.

ZachXBT also said other affected wallets could be restored soon. That update followed Circle’s earlier action against 16 wallets tied to separate business operations, including exchanges, casinos, and foreign exchange platforms.

Earlier reports said the freeze was linked to a sealed US civil case. At the same time, public reporting said the targeted wallets appeared to belong to unrelated businesses, with no clear public explanation for why all 16 were included in one action.

ZachXBT criticized the decision in strong terms. He wrote,

“In my 5-plus years of investigations, it could potentially be the single most incompetent freeze I have seen.” 

He also said Circle had “zero basis” to freeze the funds tied to the case.

In addition, the partial unfreeze has kept the wider debate alive around how centralized stablecoin issuers handle enforcement. Market observers said restoring one wallet does not fully answer the questions raised by the earlier blacklisting.

MetaMask security researcher Taylor Monahan also called for stronger investigative standards and accountability when issuers freeze user funds. Current reporting said she pointed to the need for clearer review procedures when court-backed actions affect active business wallets.

The case has renewed attention on the powers built into centralized stablecoins such as USDC. Public reporting noted that Circle can block addresses, a feature supporters link to compliance needs and critics link to control over user funds.

Bitcoiners have long theorized the sort of black swan events that could cripple the cryptocurrency network, rendering it unusable. Scenarios postulated range from nuclear apocalypse to a catastrophic internet failure – either of which would of course affect humanity in much more tangible ways than merely their ability to transact onchain.

One of the greatest threats envisaged, and which is now being routinely discussed, concerns the specter of quantum computing. Once sufficiently powerful quantum machines arrive, doomsdayers warn, cryptography could collapse overnight, affecting not just Bitcoin but most blockchains as well as traditional banking and web security.

The reason why this fear has gained mindshare, while other black swans – alien technology, say, or Satoshi’s 1M dormant bitcoins being reactivated – haven’t is because the quantum threat has a realistic chance of materializing. Indeed, many would say it’s inevitable and that it’s just a question of when it arrives.

Are we talking years or decades? If it’s the latter, there’s ample time for the world to migrate to quantum-proof systems. If it’s the former, then Houston we have a problem. Which is why it makes sense to head it off now so that when that day arrives, the world is ready and has implemented solutions to prevent digital assets and the distributed ledgers on which they run from being compromised.

As a result, researchers are increasingly paying attention to cryptographic systems that are quantum-resistant, ensuring they remain secure even in a world where quantum computers exist. Fully Homomorphic Encryption (FHE) falls firmly into this category, which is one of the primary reasons why it’s attracting growing interest across Web3 and traditional computing.

To understand why, we need to unpack the quantum threat and examine how FHE’s underlying mathematics differ from the cryptography most blockchains rely on today.

The Quantum Computing Problem

Most people don’t understand quantum computing at a deep level, which is unsurprising given its complexity. But they do understand the significance of the threat it presents. As you’re likely aware, traditional computers process information as bits that exist in one of two states, 0 or 1. Quantum computers use quantum bits, or qubits, which can exist in multiple states simultaneously thanks to a property known as superposition.

Without going too far down the physics rabbit hole, the practical implication is that certain problems which would take classical computers thousands or millions of years to solve can theoretically be solved far faster on a quantum machine. This matters because many widely used encryption systems depend on mathematical problems that are easy to compute in one direction but extremely difficult to reverse.

Two of the most important examples are RSA encryption, which relies on the difficulty of factoring large prime numbers, and Elliptic Curve Cryptography (ECC), which relies on the difficulty of solving discrete logarithm problems. Both of these are vulnerable to a quantum algorithm known as Shor’s Algorithm, which can efficiently solve the mathematical problems that secure them, and ECC is particularly relevant to blockchain because it forms the backbone of most crypto wallet security.

Why Blockchain Could Be Vulnerable

In most blockchain networks, control of funds ultimately comes down to possession of a private key. When you send a transaction, the network verifies that you own that key by checking a digital signature derived from elliptic curve cryptography. Under classical computing assumptions, deriving the private key from the public key is computationally infeasible.

But with sufficiently powerful quantum hardware running Shor’s Algorithm, that equation changes. A quantum attacker could theoretically derive the private key from the public key, allowing them to forge signatures and potentially drain wallets.

This doesn’t necessarily mean the threat is imminent. Current quantum computers remain far too small and error-prone to perform these attacks at scale. But cryptography operates on long time horizons and assets stored on a blockchain today need to remain secure decades into the future – which brings us back to FHE.

Why FHE is naturally Quantum-Resistant

Fully Homomorphic Encryption is built differently. That’s because most modern FHE implementations rely on lattice-based cryptography, which is based on the difficulty of solving problems involving high-dimensional geometric structures called lattices.

In simple terms, the challenge involves solving large systems of equations that include small amounts of noise or randomness. For classical computers, solving these problems efficiently is extremely difficult and – critically – no known quantum algorithms can solve them dramatically faster.

This makes lattice-based systems among the leading candidates for post-quantum cryptography, and organizations such as the U.S. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) have selected several lattice-based algorithms as future cryptographic standards.

Because most FHE schemes are built on these same mathematical foundations, they inherit the same resistance to quantum attacks. In other words, FHE wasn’t originally designed as a quantum defense mechanism but the mathematics it relies on happens to align with the direction post-quantum cryptography is moving.

What this means for Blockchain

Quantum resistance is particularly important for blockchain systems because they’re designed to be enduring infra. We don’t know what one bitcoin will be worth in 20 years, but we’d like to have the confidence that it will be worth something and thus worth holding as a long-term investment – as well as ultimately bequeathing to our descendants.

Which is another reason why it’s important to be thinking about quantum computing now. It’s also worth noting, at this juncture, that blockchains can’t simply swap out cryptographic systems overnight. Their security assumptions are embedded into everything from consensus mechanisms to wallet architecture.

If a widely used cryptographic primitive becomes vulnerable, migrating an entire blockchain ecosystem would be – as Bane would put it – extremely painful. This is why the industry has begun circling FHE.

Because it allows computation on encrypted data and relies on quantum-resistant mathematics, FHE offers a pathway to privacy-preserving blockchain systems that are also post-quantum secure. This is particularly relevant for applications involving sensitive financial data.

The role of FHE in private DeFi

One of the most promising uses of FHE in blockchain today is encrypted decentralized finance. Public blockchains are of course transparent by design, and while this transparency is valuable for verification, it creates problems in financial markets where strategies and wallet balances become visible to everyone.

Fully Homomorphic Encryption addresses this by allowing smart contracts to operate on encrypted balances. For example, a lending protocol can verify that a borrower has enough collateral to secure a loan without revealing the exact amount and liquidation thresholds can remain hidden, preventing traders from targeting vulnerable positions. Encrypted lending models built on FHE demonstrate how smart contracts can enforce financial rules while keeping sensitive information private.

In this context, FHE delivers two benefits simultaneously: privacy coupled with long-term cryptographic resilience.

A future-proof cryptographic model

The rise of quantum computing has forced cryptographers to rethink the assumptions underpinning modern security. It seems inevitable that technologies built around classical cryptographic primitives may eventually need to be replaced. It could happen slowly or it could occur overnight due to a sudden quantum computing breakthrough.

What matters is that when it does happen, we’re prepped and ready rather than scrambling around for a solution – by which point it may be too late. We don’t know how long the pre-quantum era will last. But we do know that every age eventually comes to pass and when the pre-quantum one does, the blockchains that are protected by Fully Homomorphic Encryption will be spared and their security guarantees unimpaired.

In the here and now, FHE is useful for many things including delivering onchain privacy. But someway down the line, its primary value may be as the defense that ensures blockchain remains immune to the onslaught of the most powerful computers ever conceived.

Nvidia now faces a certified investor class in a long-running securities case tied to the 2017-2018 crypto mining boom. 

A California federal judge ruled on March 25 that shareholders who bought Nvidia stock during a defined period can pursue their claims together, while the case moves into its next stage.

US District Judge Haywood S. Gilliam Jr. certified a class covering investors who acquired Nvidia common stock from August 10, 2017, through November 15, 2018. The ruling focused on whether the alleged statements may have affected Nvidia’s share price, which is a key issue in class certification.

The order does not decide whether Nvidia or Chief Executive Jensen Huang committed fraud. It allows investors to press the case together instead of filing separate lawsuits.

Investors allege that Nvidia and Huang misled the market about how much gaming revenue came from GPU sales tied to cryptocurrency miners. Current reporting says the plaintiffs claim Nvidia concealed more than $1 billion in crypto-related GPU sales during that period.

The complaint links the case to two market reactions in 2018. Court filings cited in the Supreme Court record say Nvidia stock fell 4.9% after the company’s August 16, 2018 earnings update, and then dropped 28.5% over two trading days after its November 15, 2018 revenue warning.

Moreover, the dispute has already survived several legal tests. In December 2024, the US Supreme Court dismissed Nvidia’s appeal and left in place a lower court ruling that allowed the shareholder suit to continue.

The case also follows Nvidia’s 2022 settlement with the US Securities and Exchange Commission. The SEC said Nvidia failed to give investors proper disclosure about the effect of cryptomining on its gaming business, and the company agreed to a cease-and-desist order and a $5.5 million penalty without admitting or denying the findings.

Nvidia prepares for the next stage

Nvidia has continued to reject the claims. After the Supreme Court decision in 2024, a company spokesperson said Nvidia was “fully prepared to continue our defense,” while maintaining that clear standards in securities litigation matter for shareholders and the market.

The court has scheduled a case conference for April 21, 2026, as the lawsuit moves forward after class certification. With that step complete, the case now shifts from the fight over procedure to the evidence that investors and Nvidia will present in court.

Tazapay has extended its Series B funding round and raised total capital to $36 million. The new funding comes as stablecoin-based payment infrastructure continues to attract backing from crypto and fintech investors focused on faster cross-border settlement.

Tazapay said Circle Ventures led the extension round. Coinbase Ventures, CMT Digital, Peak XV Partners, and Ripple also joined the funding.

The company said the new capital will support its digital settlement technology for cross-border payments. It also plans to use the funds to secure more licenses and expand operations in Asia, Latin America, the Middle East, and the Americas.

Tazapay said it now serves more than 1,000 enterprises and fintechs across 30 countries. The company also said it already holds licenses in Singapore, Canada, Australia, and the United States.

It added that license applications are active in the European Union, the United Arab Emirates, and Hong Kong. This part of the plan shows that the company is focusing on regulated markets as it expands its payment network.

Chief business officer Kanupriya Sharda said demand remains strong across several regions. She said, 

“The demand we’re seeing from enterprises and fintechs across Asia, LATAM, and the Middle East is unmistakable; businesses want to move money faster, cheaper, and with full regulatory confidence.”

Tazapay also said part of the funding will go toward infrastructure for “agentic payments.” The company did not give full details in the announcement, but it placed that product area alongside its broader settlement and licensing strategy.

Stablecoin payment firms continue to draw investor support

The Tazapay round comes as more firms build stablecoin and fiat payment rails for banks, fintechs, and global businesses. Investors have continued to fund platforms that promise faster transfers and lower cross-border payment costs.

Earlier this month, Ripple said Ripple Payments had expanded into an end-to-end stablecoin and fiat platform. Ripple said the service is live in more than 60 markets and has processed over $100 billion in volume.

In May 2025, cross-border payments firm Conduit raised $36 million in a Series A round. The company said it would use the capital to scale its payment system and expand fiat and stablecoin offerings.

Conduit has promoted its network as an alternative to SWIFT for international money movement. Tazapay’s latest raise now places it among the firms building the next wave of cross-border payment infrastructure.

US Representative Maxine Waters, the ranking Democrat on the House Financial Services Committee, is demanding answers from the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City over the approval of Kraken Financial’s limited-purpose master account.

In a letter Thursday, Waters asked Kansas City Fed President Jeff Schmid to respond by April 10, outlining what Kraken’s approval means in practice; which Federal Reserve services it can access; the conditions or restrictions that apply and what anti-money laundering and consumer protection measures were considered.

Kraken’s banking unit was granted a limited-purpose master account by the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City earlier this month. It was seen as a milestone for the crypto industry as several crypto-linked US companies have been pursuing a master account with the Fed for years. 

The account provides direct access to Fedwire, the Fed’s core payments system, potentially allowing Kraken to move money on the same rails used by banks and credit unions. 

“The Kansas City Fed’s announcement does not disclose specific information about Kraken’s access to the range of Federal Reserve financial services due to the confidentiality of business information provided by applicants,” Waters wrote in the letter.

“Answers to these questions are critical to ensuring that the process of approving Federal Reserve Bank account access is conducted consistently with the law, with impartiality, and in a manner that continues to foster a safe and efficient payment system,” she added. 

Full transparency required to mitigate risks, Waters argues

Waters also argued that Kraken’s access to the Federal Reserve’s payment system raises policy, regulatory and consumer protection concerns. As a result, she said full transparency and clear legal grounding are required to ensure any risks are properly managed.

“Innovations in payments, digital assets, tokenization, and even artificial intelligence are rapidly outpacing statutory frameworks developed to mitigate risk, promote competition, and protect consumers in a traditional financial environment,” Waters wrote.

“Given this environment, much is required of those who exercise discretionary authority over safe access to, and operation of, our nation’s critical financial infrastructure,” she added.

Related: SEC is no longer a ‘cop on the beat‘ on crypto, says US lawmaker

US crypto companies that have been pursuing Fed master accounts include Caitlin Long’s Custodia Bank, which filed a court petition in late 2025 to renew its bid.

Crypto platform Anchorage Digital Bank also applied for an account last year and Ripple has applied through its Standard Custody & Trust Company.

Waters is classed as “strongly against crypto” by advocacy group

Crypto advocacy group Stand With Crypto has a scorecard for US politicians on how supportive they are of crypto based on public statements and voting behavior.

Waters is listed by the group as “strongly against crypto,” based on five statements and six votes against crypto legislation, including the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act and the GENIUS Act.

She also called for a hearing with Securities and Exchange Commission Chair Paul Atkins last year, citing concerns about the agency’s dismissal of crypto enforcement cases.

Magazine: How crypto laws changed in 2025 — and how they’ll change in 2026