Crypto World
Uniswap Labs Bought Pons Token for 'Long-Term Alignment'
Uniswap Labs has bought PONS, the token of the memecoin launchpad that takes most of the launchpad fees paid on Robinhood Chain, the launchpad said on Thursday. The purchase gives Uniswap Labs a stake in the application feeding the chain that now carries most of Uniswap V4's trading. Pons V2 routes… Read the full story at The Defiant
UniCredit has begun exploring an expansion of its digital asset business that could give clients access to crypto custody, brokerage, tokenized investments and stablecoin services.
Summary
- UniCredit is selecting a technology provider for infrastructure that could support digital asset custody and brokerage services.
- The bank is considering tokenized investments, fixed income securities, stablecoin services and ways for clients to gain crypto exposure.
- UniCredit has already offered professional clients a product linked to BlackRock’s Bitcoin ETF and issued a tokenized minibond on a public blockchain.
- The bank is part of Qivalis, a European banking consortium preparing to launch a euro denominated stablecoin.
People familiar with the plans said the Italian bank is selecting a technology provider that could supply the infrastructure needed to hold digital assets and support their purchase and sale, although discussions remain at an early stage and no final decision has been made.
The work could take UniCredit beyond the individual crypto-linked products it has offered professional investors and give the bank technology for a larger set of digital asset services.
Potential uses under consideration include tokenized investment products and fixed-income securities, according to the people. UniCredit is examining how clients could use stablecoins and gain exposure to cryptocurrencies through the infrastructure.
A UniCredit spokesperson declined to comment.
UniCredit considers crypto custody and brokerage infrastructure
The technology provider under consideration would give UniCredit the systems required to custody digital assets and facilitate trading, creating infrastructure that could support several products rather than a single investment offering.
Specific services have yet to be decided, and the bank could change or abandon parts of the plan while discussions continue.
UniCredit has already tested crypto exposure through traditional investment products. In July 2025, crypto.news previously reported that the bank had introduced a structured product linked to IBIT for professional clients in Italy.
The five-year, dollar-denominated investment certificate was tied to BlackRock’s iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF and offered full capital protection at maturity. It allowed eligible clients to participate in Bitcoin-linked returns without holding the cryptocurrency directly.
UniCredit has so far concentrated its digital asset activity on professional investors and corporate clients. Building custody and brokerage technology could give the lender another route for offering digital assets through its existing banking operations.
The bank has taken a similar approach to blockchain-based securities. Late last year, UniCredit issued Italy’s first tokenized minibond on a public blockchain, using blockchain infrastructure to issue and transfer a traditional financial instrument.
Its latest discussions cover tokenized fixed-income securities as one of the possible areas where the new infrastructure could be used.
Stablecoins form another part of UniCredit’s plans
Stablecoins are already part of UniCredit’s digital asset strategy through Qivalis, the Amsterdam-based company formed by European banks to develop a euro-denominated stablecoin.
The project initially brought together 10 banks, including UniCredit, BNP Paribas, ING, Banca Sella, KBC, DekaBank, Danske Bank, SEB, CaixaBank and Raiffeisen Bank International. Qivalis is targeting the second half of 2026 for the token’s launch, subject to regulatory approval.
Its membership has since expanded sharply. In May, Qivalis expanded to 37 banks across 15 European countries after adding 25 institutions, including ABN AMRO, Rabobank, Nordea and Intesa Sanpaolo.
Qivalis plans to operate as an electronic money institution under supervision from the Dutch central bank. The group is seeking to issue a MiCA-compliant token backed 1:1 with euros, with its first uses centered on institutional settlement, treasury operations and tokenized assets.
In April, the banking group selected Fireblocks for infrastructure supporting the planned token. Fireblocks is providing tokenization technology, wallet infrastructure and lifecycle management tools, alongside systems for identity verification and sanctions screening.
UniCredit’s separate technology search could cover stablecoin use by its own clients, according to the people familiar with the bank’s plans. Details on how those services would operate or whether they would connect with Qivalis have not been finalized.
MiCA gives European banks a framework for crypto services
The plans are being considered as European banks increase their work with crypto assets, tokenized securities and blockchain-based settlement under the European Union’s Markets in Crypto-Assets regulation.
MiCA established a common regulatory framework across the bloc for crypto asset service providers and stablecoin issuers, replacing a system where requirements differed between national markets.
Several banks have since moved into areas such as custody, trading and stablecoin infrastructure. Italy’s Banca Sella, another Qivalis member, received Bank of Italy approval to provide crypto custody and transfer services through MiCA’s notification route for credit institutions.
The relationship between banks and stablecoin issuers has brought its own regulatory questions. UniCredit deputy vice chair Elena Carletti, who chairs the bank’s board risk committee, warned in May that Europe could face difficulties responding to stress involving crypto-linked bank deposits.
Carletti cited the 2023 collapse of Silicon Valley Bank, when Circle disclosed that $3.3 billion of reserves backing USDC were held at the failed lender. She said European authorities could have fewer options to provide similar protection because EU deposit insurance is capped at €100,000.
Her comments came while UniCredit was participating in the Qivalis stablecoin project and European lenders were preparing regulated blockchain-based payment and settlement services under MiCA.
Qivalis’ planned token remains scheduled for the second half of 2026, subject to authorization from De Nederlandsche Bank.
UniCredit builds out digital capital markets business
UniCredit has been developing its digital capital markets operations outside cryptocurrency products as well.
This week, the bank announced that it had acquired a minority stake in VC Trade, a German platform focused on lending markets. The investment is intended to expand UniCredit’s digital capital markets capabilities.
Its technology search would add another piece to that work by creating infrastructure capable of holding and trading digital assets directly.
The bank has not disclosed which technology providers are being considered, how much it could spend on the project or when a provider might be selected. Decisions on whether UniCredit will ultimately offer crypto brokerage, custody, stablecoin services or tokenized securities through the system remain under discussion.
AMC Entertainment Chief Executive Adam Aron demanded early Friday that Robinhood stop trading the stock tokens that reference his company's shares, and said AMC has asked its outside securities counsel to examine whether it can compel the broker to stop. Robinhood's chief legal officer, a former… Read the full story at The Defiant
💻 Watch Video… Read the full story at The Defiant
Everyone is reporting a tax rise. Do the arithmetic and Germany is cutting the top rate for active traders by nineteen points, from 45% to 26.375%. The people getting hit are the ones who buy and sit on it, which until now was the whole point of holding crypto in Germany.
Summary
- Germany’s Federal Ministry of Finance circulated a draft bill on September 9 that would end the country’s one-year tax-free holding period for cryptocurrency, replacing it with the flat capital income tax.
- The rate is 25% plus the 5.5% solidarity surcharge, an effective 26.375% before any church tax, applied regardless of how long an asset is held.
- The cutoff is December 31, 2026: assets bought on or after January 1, 2027 fall under the new regime, while earlier purchases would remain under existing rules.
- Short-term traders would pay less. Gains realised inside twelve months are currently taxed at personal income rates reaching 45%, so moving them to a flat 26.375% is a reduction.
- This is the fourth attempt in roughly eighteen months, and the first to sit inside the budget bill, which is considerably harder to strip out than a standalone motion.
Hold a coin in Germany for twelve months and one day and the gain is yours, untaxed, no cap, no form, no rate to look up. That rule has quietly made Germany the best place in Europe to be a long-term crypto holder, and it was never designed for crypto at all. It came from a provision written for art and gold coins, which German tax authorities applied to digital assets because that is the drawer they fit in.
On September 9 the Finance Ministry circulated a draft to close it.
The coverage has gone straight to “Germany taxes crypto,” which is true and misses the more interesting half. The bill moves crypto into the Abgeltungsteuer, the flat withholding tax that already covers shares and dividends. That rate is 25%, or 26.375% once you add the solidarity surcharge. Sell inside a year today and you pay your personal income rate, which reaches 45%.
So the same bill that takes away the exemption hands active traders a cut of nearly nineteen percentage points.
Germany is not raising crypto tax. It is deleting the distinction between holding and trading, and the people who built their position around that distinction are the ones who pay for it.
What the draft actually says
Two dates, which is why half the coverage says 2027 and the other half says 2028. Both are right about different things.
The regime. Crypto gains would move into the Abgeltungsteuer, Germany’s flat withholding tax on capital income. The headline rate is 25%. The solidarity surcharge adds 5.5% of the tax itself, producing an effective 26.375%. Church tax applies on top for those who pay it.
The cutoff. Assets acquired on or after January 1, 2027 fall under the new treatment. Assets bought on or before December 31, 2026 would remain under the current rules, which is the grandfathering provision, though the draft’s treatment of it has been described as not fully confirmed.
The withholding start. Crypto service providers would be required to withhold the tax automatically from January 1, 2028, a year after the law’s effective date, giving platforms time to build the systems. That gap is why some coverage dates the change to 2027 and other coverage to 2028. Both are describing the same bill.
The documentation trap. Providers may rely on purchase prices and acquisition dates supplied by customers when assets move between platforms. An investor who cannot produce that documentation faces the flat 25% applied to the full proceeds, with no deduction for the original cost. That provision has received almost no attention and it is the one most likely to produce unpleasant surprises, because self-custodied assets moved onto a platform years after purchase are exactly the case it captures.
What else changes. Income from crypto lending and staking would be reclassified as capital income, bringing it under the same regime. Investors would receive the standard 1,000 euros savings allowance. And crypto losses could be offset against gains from securities, which is not currently possible and is a meaningful improvement for anyone running both.
Who pays more and who pays less
Here is who wins and who loses, which also tells you who will fight it.
Long-term holders lose the most. Someone buying in February 2027 and selling in 2029 currently pays nothing. Under the draft they pay 26.375% on the full gain. That is the entire tax break, removed, for anyone entering after the cutoff.
Short-term traders gain. Someone buying and selling inside twelve months currently pays their marginal income rate, up to 45% for high earners. Under the draft they pay 26.375%. For an active trader in the top bracket, that is a reduction of roughly nineteen percentage points on every realised gain.
Loss-makers gain. Offsetting crypto losses against securities gains is new and useful, and it applies across a portfolio instead of within an asset class.
Stakers and lenders face a rate change of uncertain direction, depending on how their income is currently treated and what bracket they occupy.
So the bill is redistributive within the crypto-holding population, not simply extractive from it. The people it hurts are the ones the current system was designed to favour, and the people it helps are the ones the current system taxed hardest. Whether that is good policy depends on whether you think a tax system should encourage holding over trading, which is a real argument with a long history in capital gains policy generally.
The ministry’s own justification points that way. Its position, as reported, is that crypto assets increasingly represent a form of private capital investment and should not remain favoured relative to other income types. That is an equalisation argument, not a revenue argument, and the revenue figures support the reading.
The revenue is small
If this were a money grab, the numbers would be bigger.
Around 160 million euros in additional revenue in 2028, rising to roughly 350 million euros annually by 2031. Against a federal budget measured in hundreds of billions of euros, that is a rounding error. One estimate cited a figure near 350 million euros as the steady-state expectation.
Two things follow. If the motivation were revenue, this is an enormous amount of legislative and administrative effort for very little money, which supports the equalisation reading. And the projections themselves deserve scepticism, because the comparable case went badly.
Austria made the same shift in 2022, moving crypto into a flat capital gains regime, and analysts tracking this proposal note it raised considerably less than officials expected. The reason is not mysterious. A tax on realised gains only collects when people realise, and removing the incentive to hold does not automatically create an incentive to sell. It can equally produce holders who simply never dispose, or who dispose elsewhere.
Why this attempt is different
One fact has appeared in a single outlet and it is the most important thing in the story.
This is the fourth push in roughly eighteen months to scrap the one-year rule. The previous three came from the Left Party, from the Greens, and from coalition budget talks, and all three failed. In May, the Finance Committee voted down a Green Party proposal to end the tax-free treatment, with the CDU/CSU, the Social Democrats, and the AfD all opposing it for differing reasons, while Die Linke supported it with reservations.
What changed is procedural. This version sits inside the budget bill instead of standing alone. A standalone motion can be voted down on its own merits by a coalition that disagrees about it. A provision inside a budget is voted on as part of a package that the government needs to pass, and stripping it requires a specific fight that someone has to want badly enough to have.
The political groundwork also differs. Finance Minister Lars Klingbeil signalled the direction in April during the 2027 budget presentation, saying the government intended to tax cryptocurrencies differently, and confirmed at a July press conference that a concrete bill was in preparation. That is a minister building toward a proposal over months, not a party tabling a motion.
Against that, the opposition has not disappeared. The AfD has reaffirmed its support for the twelve-month rule and won nearly 44% of the vote in Saxony-Anhalt this month, though tax policy is federal and no state government can alter it. And the draft remains in early coordination among federal ministries, meaning individual provisions can still change before it reaches the legislature.
What a dated cutoff does to behaviour
A grandfathering date is a deadline, and deadlines move money.
Anyone in Germany who intends to hold cryptocurrency for more than a year now has an incentive to acquire it before December 31, 2026. Buying on December 30 preserves the exemption permanently for that position. Buying on January 2 forfeits it permanently. The difference between those two dates, for a position held to a substantial gain, is the entire tax liability.
That produces a predictable pattern: accelerated buying into the cutoff by German residents planning long holds, followed by a cohort of grandfathered positions that their owners have a strong reason never to sell into a taxable event. The second effect is the more durable one, and it is a known consequence of grandfathering in capital gains policy generally. It creates a locked-in population whose optimal move is to hold indefinitely, borrow against the asset if they need liquidity, and never realise.
The reverse incentive also exists and has been noted in the coverage: holders with large unrealised gains under the current rules may reassess whether to realise them before any new regime could apply, which is a selling pressure and not a buying one. Which effect dominates depends on the size of existing unrealised positions relative to intended new purchases, and nobody has that data.
For anyone reading this outside Germany, the useful point is that the cutoff date is the operative fact, not the rate. Rates change slowly. A dated line between two permanent treatments changes behaviour immediately.
Where this leaves Germany in Europe
The competitiveness panic is overdone in both directions.
Germany’s exemption was genuinely unusual. Most European jurisdictions tax crypto gains as capital income at rates broadly comparable to the 26.375% being proposed, and several have moved in exactly this direction over the past several years. Austria did it in 2022. The trend across the bloc has been toward treating digital assets like other capital investments, which is also the direction the European regulatory framework has taken since MiCA reached full enforcement.
So Germany is not becoming hostile. It is becoming ordinary, and the proposal would place it roughly in line with its neighbours instead of at the punitive end.
The competitiveness argument that some analysts have raised, that capital could move toward friendlier jurisdictions if the bill passes, is real but narrower than it sounds. It applies to individuals with the flexibility to relocate their tax residence, which is a small population. It does not apply to institutions, which are taxed under corporate rules regardless. And the jurisdictions that remain more favourable are mostly smaller ones whose attractiveness depends on treatments that face the same equalisation pressure Germany is now applying.
How the current rule came about
Nobody sat down and decided crypto deserved a tax break. That is worth knowing, because it explains how easily this one can be taken away.
German tax law distinguishes between capital investments, taxed under the flat withholding regime, and private sales transactions, taxed under a separate provision covering assets held privately. The private sales provision carries a speculation period: sell inside a year and the gain is taxed at your personal rate, hold beyond it and the gain falls out of taxation entirely. That treatment was built for things like art, collectibles, and precious metals, where the state took the view that occasional private disposals were not the business of the tax system.
When cryptocurrency arrived, German tax authorities classified it as a private asset instead of a capital investment, which routed it into that provision automatically. The result was not a deliberate crypto incentive. It was the mechanical consequence of a classification decision made about a category the rule predated by decades.
Two things follow from that history. The exemption has always been vulnerable to reclassification and not to legislation, because moving crypto into the capital investment category achieves the same result without amending the speculation period at all, and that is exactly the mechanism the current draft uses. And the ministry’s stated justification, that crypto increasingly represents a form of private capital investment, is a classification argument, not a tax-policy one. It says the original categorisation was wrong, not that the rate should change.
That framing matters for how the bill will be defended in parliament. A government proposing a tax rise has to argue that more revenue is needed. A government proposing a reclassification has to argue only that an asset was filed in the wrong drawer, which is a considerably easier case to make and much harder to attack on fairness grounds.
What this does to German exchanges and custodians
The rate is not the hard part. The withholding is, and it lands on exchanges, not on you.
From January 2028, crypto service providers operating in Germany would be required to withhold the tax automatically at source. That is the same mechanism banks already run for securities under the Abgeltungsteuer, and it is why the draft gives platforms a year between the effective date and the withholding start.
Building it is not trivial. A platform must know each customer’s acquisition date and purchase price for every asset in order to compute a gain, and crypto moves between platforms and self-custody in ways securities generally do not. The draft addresses this by allowing providers to rely on purchase prices and acquisition dates supplied by customers when assets transfer in, which shifts the documentation burden onto the holder and creates the trap described earlier: no documentation means tax on the full proceeds with no cost deduction.
Three consequences follow for anyone operating in the German market.
Platforms need cost-basis infrastructure, including a mechanism for accepting, validating, and storing customer-supplied acquisition data. That is a build measured in months, which is presumably why the year gap exists.
Self-custody becomes more expensive in practice, not because it is taxed differently but because a holder moving assets onto a platform to sell must produce documentation the platform will accept. Assets acquired years earlier through channels that no longer exist are the hard case.
And the competitive position of German-licensed platforms shifts. A provider that withholds correctly is a provider whose customers face no filing burden, which is a genuine service advantage. A provider outside the German perimeter offers no withholding and leaves the customer to self-report, which is more work and more risk. That asymmetry tends to favour regulated domestic venues, which is usually the intent.
The question the bill does not settle
There is one thing the draft fudges, and it happens to be the fastest-growing part of the market.
Staking and lending income would be reclassified as capital income under the new regime. That is straightforward for a simple arrangement: tokens are lent, interest accrues, the interest is income. It is considerably less clear for the arrangements that dominate current practice.
Liquid staking, where a holder deposits an asset and receives a derivative token representing the position, involves at least two events that could each be taxable: the deposit and receipt of the derivative, and the eventual redemption. Whether the deposit constitutes a disposal, whether the derivative has its own acquisition date, and whether rewards accrue as income or as appreciation in the derivative’s value are all questions with different answers in different jurisdictions.
Restaking, liquidity provision, and structured yield products compound the problem in the same direction. Each involves a holder giving up one asset and receiving another, sometimes repeatedly, in arrangements whose tax character depends on how a rule written for securities is mapped onto instruments that did not exist when it was written.
This is not a criticism unique to the German draft. Every jurisdiction attempting to bring crypto under an existing capital income regime faces the same mapping problem, and most have resolved it slowly through administrative guidance instead of in the statute itself. The reason it deserves flagging here is that the withholding requirement makes it operationally urgent. A platform required to withhold tax automatically from 2028 needs a definitive answer about what constitutes a taxable event, and that answer has to exist before the systems are built rather than after.
Watch for supplementary guidance from the ministry on these categories specifically. Its absence by the time the bill reaches parliament would be a meaningful gap, and its content would tell German holders considerably more about their actual position than the headline rate does.
What a German holder should actually be thinking about
Strip out the politics and there are four practical questions, roughly in order of how much money they involve.
Do you have your cost basis? This is the one that will bite hardest and almost nobody is talking about it. Under the draft, if a platform cannot see what you paid and when, it applies 25% to the entire sale proceeds. Not the gain. The proceeds. Coins bought in 2017 on an exchange that no longer exists, moved through three wallets, and deposited somewhere in 2028 are the exact case this captures. Start assembling the paper trail now, because reconstructing it later against a withholding agent is a considerably worse experience than doing it in advance.
Are you buying before or after the line? December 31, 2026. Everything acquired on or before that date keeps the old treatment permanently, assuming grandfathering survives. Everything after falls under the flat rate. For a position you intend to hold for years, that single date is the difference between a full tax bill and none.
Do you trade or do you hold? If you turn positions over inside twelve months, this bill is a rate cut and you should stop reading the alarmed headlines. If you buy and wait, it removes your entire advantage.
Do you have losses parked anywhere? Being able to offset crypto losses against securities gains is new, and for anyone carrying dead bags alongside a brokerage account, it is worth real money.
None of this is advice and none of it is settled, because the thing being discussed is a draft in ministerial coordination that has not reached the Bundestag. But the four questions do not change regardless of what the final text says, and three of them are worth answering this year either way.
The part that should worry other jurisdictions
There is a pattern in this bill worth noticing if you live somewhere else, because the mechanism travels.
Germany is not amending its crypto tax rules. It is reclassifying crypto out of one existing category and into another. The private-sales provision with its twelve-month speculation period stays exactly as it is, still covering art and collectibles. Crypto simply stops being filed there.
That is a much lower bar to clear than writing new tax law. There is no need to argue about whether digital assets are special, no need to set a bespoke rate, no need to defend a number in front of a committee. The argument reduces to: this thing looks more like a share than like a painting, so it goes in the share drawer. That is an administrative claim dressed as a legislative one, and it is very hard to attack on fairness grounds because the rate being applied is the rate everyone else already pays on capital income.
Any country that carved out favourable crypto treatment by classification rather than by statute is exposed to the same move. The favourable treatment was never a policy decision anyone defended on its merits. It was a filing accident, and filing accidents get corrected quietly.
The corollary is that jurisdictions which wrote deliberate crypto tax regimes, with rates and thresholds chosen on purpose, are more stable than the ones that ended up generous by default. Deliberate policy can be repealed, which requires a political fight someone has to win. A classification can be revised by a ministry with a draft.
Germany’s twelve-month rule survived four attempts to legislate it away. It may not survive being reclassified.
What to watch
- Whether it survives coordination. The draft is in early coordination among federal ministries, and provisions can change before it reaches parliament. Watch for the grandfathering clause specifically, which has been described as not fully confirmed and which is the provision with the largest behavioural effect.
- Whether it stays in the budget. The procedural fact that makes this attempt different is its placement inside the budget bill. If it is separated into a standalone measure, the record of the previous three attempts becomes the relevant guide.
- The documentation provision. The rule that undocumented cost basis means tax on full proceeds is severe, and it is the kind of detail that generates amendments once affected parties read it.
- Buying patterns into the cutoff. German exchange volumes through the fourth quarter of 2026 are the observable test of whether the deadline is changing behaviour, and they are published.
- Austria’s actual numbers. The clearest available evidence on whether the revenue projections hold, and the comparison analysts are already making.
What is Germany proposing to change?
The Federal Ministry of Finance drafted a bill on September 9 that would end Germany’s one-year tax-free holding period for cryptocurrency and move gains into the flat capital income tax, known as the Abgeltungsteuer. The rate is 25% plus a 5.5% solidarity surcharge, an effective 26.375% before church tax, applied regardless of holding period.
When would it take effect?
The regime would apply to assets acquired on or after January 1, 2027. Crypto service providers would begin withholding the tax automatically from January 1, 2028, a year later, to give platforms time to build the systems. That two-date structure is why coverage has cited both years for the same bill.
Would everyone pay more tax?
No. Long-term holders lose the exemption entirely and pay 26.375% where they previously paid nothing. Short-term traders pay less: gains realised inside twelve months are currently taxed at personal income rates reaching 45%, so the flat rate is a reduction of up to roughly nineteen percentage points for high earners.
What happens to crypto I already own?
Under the grandfathering provision, assets bought on or before December 31, 2026 would remain under the existing rules, meaning the one-year exemption still applies to them. That provision has been reported as not fully confirmed in the draft, so it is the element most worth watching as the bill moves.
What about staking and lending income?
The proposal would reclassify income from crypto lending and staking as capital income, bringing it under the same flat regime. Whether that raises or lowers an individual’s liability depends on how their income is currently treated and which bracket they occupy.
How much revenue would it raise?
Around 160 million euros in 2028, rising to roughly 350 million euros annually by 2031. Against a federal budget in the hundreds of billions, that is very small, which supports reading the bill as an equalisation measure and not a revenue measure. Austria’s comparable 2022 shift raised considerably less than officials projected.
Is this likely to pass?
More likely than the previous three attempts, though not certain. This is the fourth push in roughly eighteen months, and the first to sit inside the budget bill rather than standing alone, which makes it harder to strip out. The Finance Committee voted down a similar Green Party proposal in May, with three parties opposing for differing reasons. The draft remains in early ministerial coordination.
What should a German holder do about it?
Nothing hasty, and consult a qualified German tax adviser, because the bill is a draft that has not reached parliament and provisions can change. What is worth understanding is that the December 31, 2026 cutoff, if it survives, creates a permanent difference between assets bought before and after it, and that documentation of purchase price and acquisition date becomes materially more important under the proposed rules. This is educational analysis, not tax advice.
Disclaimer: This article is for information and educational purposes only and does not constitute tax, legal, or investment advice. It describes a draft bill in early ministerial coordination that has not reached the German parliament, whose provisions may change or be withdrawn. Consult a qualified German tax adviser regarding your own circumstances. Information is accurate as of September 10, 2026.
Bitcoin broke a range it had held through the Asian and European sessions when the August employment report landed at 8:30 a.m. ET on Friday, and has spent the U.S. session clawing back part of the drop. Every large token except the privacy coins is lower. The print reopened a rate decision that… Read the full story at The Defiant
Robinhood Chain kept producing blocks through the outage reported on Friday. What stopped was its transaction data reaching Ethereum, for 14 minutes across two gaps. Posting those batches is what puts Robinhood Chain's data where anyone can reconstruct the chain and check it, and what allows funds… Read the full story at The Defiant
The public fight between AMC Entertainment Chief Executive Adam Aron and Robinhood over tokenized AMC shares spilled on Friday into a dispute among the companies that build the instruments, over which of three incompatible designs should become the standard. The models differ in what the holder… Read the full story at The Defiant
Whether morally acceptable or not, US President Donald Trump made a bold promise earlier this week, suggesting that his administration will pay every adult American $5,000 if his party wins the midterm elections.
History has shown that when free money enters the pockets of Americans, at least a portion of those funds tends to be redirected to the crypto market (remember COVID?). As such, some analysts claimed that if Republicans win and Trump fulfills his promise, the stimulus checks could fuel an “insane” altseason. But what about specific alts, such as XRP?
Realistic Target
Before we get into ChatGPT’s specific targets for XRP, some of which are quite wild, let’s clear one thing upfront – even if Trump really wants to give so much money to every American adult, it would be a very hard task. At first, he would require congressional approval. If his party wins, that means they will be able to vote for it.
However, even some Republicans were highly concerned about this promise, claiming that it would spike inflation further and worsen the country’s fiscal stability. This is because it would cost the country about $1.2 trillion to $1.35 trillion, according to estimates.
“I would personally throw everything of my heart and soul to stop it, because it would actually do more damage to working people than would ever help them,” U.S. Representative David Schweikert, an Arizona Republican set to leave Congress at the end of his term, told Reuters.
But nevertheless, let’s imagine that he would indeed go through and $5,000 would reach every American adult. ChatGPT is quite optimistic that XRP “would be one of the better-positioned larger-cap altcoins to benefit.”
Given the asset’s current price tag of around $1.40, the popular AI platform noted that its most realistic target would be somewhere between $2.50 and $3.00. This would be quite a dramatic increase for XRP, more than 100%, if it’s to reach the larger target. But this wasn’t ChatGPT’s most bullish one.
Let’s Go Wild
In a follow-up, significantly more bullish scenario, the chatbot outlined even bigger targets for XRP if all stars align. In case the broader crypto markets begin a more notable expansion wave, similar to the one from two years ago, led by BTC’s bull market restart, XRP can easily clear $2.00 and head toward $3.00 within weeks. If financial conditions in the US subsequently ease, then “I become substantially more bullish,” said ChatGPT.
“In that environment, $3.00 XRP wouldn’t strike me as remotely extreme. $4.00-$5.00 becomes plausible,” it noted.
Everything above $5.00, though, ChatGPT said it would be more of a “mania scenario” rather than a fundamental expectation at this point.
The post How High Could XRP Go if Trump Gives Every American $5K? ChatGPT Sets Specific Targets appeared first on CryptoPotato.
Frgmnt has partnered with Anchorage Digital to give institutional clients access to its fUSD stablecoin and sfUSD staking product through Anchorage’s existing custody infrastructure.
Summary
- Frgmnt has partnered with Anchorage Digital to give institutional clients access to fUSD and sfUSD through its custody infrastructure.
- Institutions will be able to hold, mint, stake, unstake and redeem fUSD without establishing a separate custody arrangement.
- fUSD is minted against USDC, with its backing deployed across selected onchain lending markets to generate rewards for sfUSD holders.
- Frgmnt said its next capped deposit wave is scheduled to open in September.
In a press release shared with crypto.news, Frgmnt said institutions will be able to hold, mint, stake, unstake and redeem fUSD through Anchorage Digital, allowing clients to use the stablecoin without setting up a separate custody arrangement.
The integration covers both fUSD and sfUSD, two assets operated by Frgmnt on Base. fUSD is minted against USDC, while holders can stake the token to receive sfUSD and earn rewards generated by the protocol’s underlying strategies.
“Institutions should be able to access onchain financial products through infrastructure that meets their operational and custody requirements,” Frgmnt CEO and co-founder Aurélien Roussel said.
Roussel said bringing the two assets into Anchorage Digital’s institutional environment would make Frgmnt accessible to funds, corporate treasuries and fintech companies already using institutional digital asset infrastructure.
Anchorage Digital gives fUSD an institutional custody route
Frgmnt deploys the USDC backing fUSD across selected onchain lending markets. Users who want exposure to the rewards generated by those strategies can stake their fUSD for sfUSD.
The partnership puts those functions inside Anchorage Digital’s custody and operational environment, where institutional clients can manage the process alongside other digital assets.
Anchorage Digital Bank N.A. operates under a federal charter and is regulated by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency. Its platform provides services including custody, staking, trading and settlement.
The company has expanded the range of onchain services available through its custody infrastructure this year. In July, Anchorage integrated Lido, allowing institutional clients to mint and burn wrapped staked Ether without moving assets outside its custody environment. Clients could access Ethereum staking rewards while retaining Anchorage’s custody, governance, reporting and settlement infrastructure.
A separate July partnership connected Anchorage with Binance for off-exchange settlement. Institutional clients gained the ability to trade on Binance while pledged crypto and U.S. dollar collateral remained in segregated custody through Anchorage’s Atlas platform.
For Frgmnt, the same custody model gives institutions a route into its onchain lending and staking system while keeping asset management within infrastructure they already use.
“Institutional adoption of onchain finance depends on combining access to innovative protocols with the security and operational standards institutions expect,” Anchorage Digital CEO and co-founder Nathan McCauley said.
“Supporting Frgmnt gives our clients another way to access onchain opportunities through trusted institutional infrastructure,” he added.
Anchorage has expanded its stablecoin business
The Frgmnt partnership follows several stablecoin integrations involving Anchorage Digital as the company builds services around issuance, custody and institutional access.
In May, Anchorage Digital began providing regulated custody for CADD, the Canadian dollar stablecoin issued by Tetra Digital Group. CADD is backed one-to-one by Canadian dollars held at a licensed Canadian trust company and was made available for institutional custody through Anchorage.
Anchorage has taken a more direct role with other stablecoins. Western Union launched its USDPT payment stablecoin on Solana in May, with Anchorage Digital Bank serving as the token’s issuer. USDPT is fully backed by U.S. dollars and was designed to operate within Western Union’s payment network.
Earlier in May, McCauley said around 20 partners were exploring stablecoin launches through Anchorage as the company moved away from taking a leading position in the Global Dollar alliance. Anchorage wanted to operate more neutrally while building infrastructure that could serve multiple stablecoin issuers.
Institutional access to stablecoins has expanded outside Anchorage as banks and digital asset infrastructure companies build custody, issuance and settlement services around the asset class. In June, BNY opened direct USDC access through its Digital Asset Custody platform, allowing institutional clients to mint, redeem, store and transfer the stablecoin within the bank’s infrastructure.
BNY already served as the primary custodian for assets backing USDC before adding the client-facing services. The bank said at the time that it planned to support more stablecoins and digital cash workflows, although it did not identify which assets would be added next.
Frgmnt deploys fUSD backing into onchain lending markets
Frgmnt takes a different approach from stablecoins designed primarily for payments or settlement because USDC deposited against fUSD can be deployed into selected lending markets.
The protocol makes its positions and performance metrics available onchain through its own statistics tools and third-party analytics platforms including Dune and DeFiLlama.
Users who mint fUSD can hold the asset or stake it for sfUSD. Rewards attached to sfUSD come from the protocol’s underlying strategies instead of being paid directly to fUSD holders.
Frgmnt has been controlling inflows through capped deposit waves while the protocol scales. According to the company, another deposit wave is scheduled to open in September.
The protocol runs on Base, Coinbase’s Ethereum layer-2 network, where native USDC has been available since September 2023. Circle introduced native USDC on Base without requiring users to bridge the stablecoin from another blockchain.
Frgmnt uses that USDC as the asset against which fUSD is minted before deploying backing across the lending markets selected by the protocol.
fUSD and sfUSD functions move inside Anchorage infrastructure
Under the new integration, an institution using Anchorage Digital can move through the fUSD lifecycle from minting to redemption within the same operational environment.
Clients can mint fUSD, hold it in custody and stake it for sfUSD. They can later unstake sfUSD and redeem fUSD without creating a separate custody setup specifically for Frgmnt.
Anchorage Digital serves institutional customers through several regulated entities. Anchorage Digital Bank operates in the U.S. under its federal charter, while Anchorage Digital Singapore is licensed by the Monetary Authority of Singapore. Anchorage Digital NY holds a BitLicense from the New York Department of Financial Services.
The company was founded in 2017 and has received funding from investors including Andreessen Horowitz, GIC, Goldman Sachs, KKR and Visa. Its valuation stands at $4.2 billion, according to the company.
Frgmnt said institutions seeking access to fUSD and sfUSD through the integration can work through their existing Anchorage Digital representative or contact Frgmnt directly.
Blockstream's Liquid sidechain is paused after nearly all the bitcoin held in its federation wallet was withdrawn on Sunday, and the recipient identified themselves onchain as white hats. Liquid said the money left through a working authorization key rather than a stolen one, which leaves the route… Read the full story at The Defiant
Remy Ma Teases Song After Update From Papoose Divorce Court
A Practical Guide to Choosing Wedding Rings as a Couple
Crypto Holders – You Have Waited 5 Years For The Next 5 Months
Memory prices are slowing because buyers ran out of money
Micron Stock Climbs Above $1,031 as AI Memory Crunch and a $50 Billion Outlook Fuel the Rally
AMD Stock Climbs After Management Lifts 2027 Data Center Outlook Toward $70 Billion in AI Sales
-
Tech4 days ago
Memory prices are slowing because buyers ran out of money
-
Business2 days agoMicron Stock Climbs Above $1,031 as AI Memory Crunch and a $50 Billion Outlook Fuel the Rally
-
Business2 days agoAMD Stock Climbs After Management Lifts 2027 Data Center Outlook Toward $70 Billion in AI Sales
-
Crypto World3 days agoBitcoin price risks $76K drop as $78K support weakens
-
Crypto World4 days agoRobinhood Stock: How To Take Advantage With Reduced Risk
-
Crypto World3 days agoEthereum price stalls below $2,500 as ADX drops to 11
-
NewsBeat4 days agoEngland up in reading, maths and science rankings as Scotland and Wales dip
-
Crypto World4 days agoIntel Stock Jumps 9% on Chip Price Hike Report, US Stake Gains $36 Billion
-
Crypto World1 day agoOKX launches 10x OpenAI, Anthropic X-Perps in Europe
-
NewsBeat3 days agoWhat went right this week: an ‘historic’ fall in violent crime, plus more
-
Crypto World2 days agoBitcoin price risks $70K if $78K neckline breaks
-
Crypto World2 days ago2 Chip Stocks Broke Out This Week. Neither Was Nvidia
-
Crypto World3 days agoBitcoin price holds near $79K as cycle drawdowns narrow
-
Business3 days agoMeta debuts long-awaited personal AI agent, Muse
-
Crypto World1 day ago
Ethereum Price Analysis: Consolidation at $2.5K Tests Momentum as On-Chain Activity Surges
-
Crypto World20 hours agoDiesel Tops $6 a Gallon for the First Time as 28 States Set Records
-
Sports4 days agoPhones confiscated, players sent home: Pakistan’s England tour turmoil revives memories of Mohammad Amir, Salman Butt and Mohammad Asif’s 2010 Lord’s spot-fixing scandal | Cricket News
-
Crypto World4 days agoPump Fun and Kraken delete Hunter Biden $LAPTOP promotion
-
Crypto World4 days agoBrent Crude Oil Moves Above $100 for the First Time in 3 Months
-
Entertainment2 days agoCase Sees Major Update As Jury Deliberations Begin
You must be logged in to post a comment Login