Solana-based automated market maker Aquifer has lost roughly $2.5 million in an exploit involving wallets on Solana and Ethereum, with the protocol offering the attacker a 20% bounty for returning most of the funds.

Blockchain security monitoring service Defimon reported the attack on Aug. 31, identifying separate Solana and Ethereum addresses controlled by the suspected exploiter. Aquifer later sent an on-chain whitehat offer seeking the return of at least 80% of the assets linked to the incident.

CME Group has launched two multi-asset cryptocurrency benchmarks, including a 10-token index that leaves out Bitcoin and Ether and tracks assets such as BNB, XRP, Solana and Hyperliquid.

According to CME Group’s index documentation, the CME CF Emerging Crypto Index and CME CF Crypto Market Index went live Monday, giving market participants separate measures for large crypto assets outside Bitcoin and Ether and for the crypto market including the two largest cryptocurrencies.

The Emerging Crypto Index contains BNB, XRP, Solana, Hyperliquid, Chainlink, Stellar Lumens, Sui, Uniswap, Avalanche and Aave. Bitcoin and Ether are excluded by design, leaving the index focused on 10 of the largest qualifying crypto assets outside the two market leaders.

Its companion Crypto Market Index tracks 12 assets. It uses the same 10 tokens but includes Bitcoin and Ether, creating a separate benchmark for measuring the large-cap crypto market with BTC and ETH included.

CME crypto indexes provide real-time and daily benchmarks

CME calculates real-time versions of both indexes every second and operates them 24 hours a day, according to the exchange’s FAQ. Separate settlement versions are calculated once each day and published at 4 p.m. in London, New York and Singapore/Hong Kong.

Both benchmarks use free-float market capitalization to determine constituent weights. Under the system, cryptocurrencies with a higher market value of tokens considered available for trading receive a larger share of the index.

CME plans to review the baskets twice a year. Reconstitution and rebalancing take place on the first business day of June and December, allowing the constituent lists and their weights to change as qualifying assets move in market value.

The Emerging Crypto Index specifically seeks the 10 largest assets that meet its requirements after Bitcoin and Ether are removed from consideration. The Crypto Market Index targets 12 qualifying cryptocurrencies while keeping BTC and ETH eligible.

Eligibility goes further than market capitalization. Under the emerging index methodology, an asset must meet custody requirements, while meme coins are excluded. CME applies a protocol-use test based on total value locked relative to fully diluted market capitalization.

The methodology contains a separate provision for newly eligible assets when an index is first created. Cryptocurrencies that do not yet qualify under U.S. national stock exchange generic listing standards for crypto exchange-traded products can still enter if they are expected to comply within 30 days.

Such assets are limited to a combined maximum weight of 10% at inception. During later scheduled reviews, constituents are required to meet the generic listing standards in force at the time.

Emerging Crypto Index is designed for financial products

The Emerging Crypto Index was built to be investible and capable of supporting passive replication by funds, according to its methodology. It can serve as a settlement benchmark for derivatives, giving the index a potential role beyond measuring spot crypto prices.

CF Benchmarks lists the emerging index as available for licensing for financial products, investment funds and derivatives. The Crypto Market Index carries the same licensing option.

CME has already used a multi-token benchmark as the settlement basis for listed crypto derivatives.

As crypto.news previously reported, the exchange launched crypto index futures in June that give traders exposure to eight cryptocurrencies through a single cash-settled contract.

Trading in the Nasdaq CME Crypto Index futures began June 8. The underlying basket contained Bitcoin, Bitcoin Cash, Ether, Solana, XRP, Cardano, Chainlink and Stellar Lumens when the contracts were introduced.

The standard futures contract trades under the NCI ticker and represents $10 multiplied by the index value, while the micro MCI contract is sized at $1 times the index. Both settle against the Nasdaq CME Crypto Settlement Price Index instead of requiring delivery of the underlying cryptocurrencies.

Before trading began, CME described the product as its first market-cap-weighted cryptocurrency futures contract when it announced the planned June launch in May.

The two benchmarks introduced Monday are separate index families from the Nasdaq CME benchmark used by those futures. Their methodologies and constituent baskets differ, with the Emerging Crypto Index specifically removing Bitcoin and Ether from its eligible universe.

CME has expanded regulated altcoin products in 2026

CME’s crypto derivatives lineup has moved further into individual altcoins during 2026, placing several assets now represented in the new indexes within its existing regulated market infrastructure.

In May, the exchange introduced Avalanche and Sui futures, adding two assets that now sit inside both of the new CME CF index baskets.

Standard Avalanche futures were launched with a contract size of 5,000 AVAX, accompanied by micro contracts representing 500 AVAX. Sui contracts were sized at 50,000 SUI, while their micro versions represented 5,000 tokens.

Those products joined existing CME futures tied to Bitcoin, Ether, Solana, XRP, Cardano, Chainlink and Stellar. The exchange had progressively added single-asset contracts as its cryptocurrency derivatives business moved past its original Bitcoin and Ether products.

Access to the crypto derivatives market changed again at the end of May when CME moved crypto trading to 24/7 on its regulated platform.

More than 7,200 cryptocurrency futures and options contracts changed hands during the first weekend after continuous trading started May 29, generating roughly $50 million in notional volume.

The schedule covers CME’s cryptocurrency futures and options while retaining brief maintenance periods. The change brought trading hours closer to the continuous operation of underlying crypto spot markets and removed the regular weekend closure that had previously separated CME trading from round-the-clock cryptocurrency markets.

CME’s two new index families operate continuously as well, with their real-time benchmarks updating once per second across the full 24-hour day. Their settlement versions provide fixed daily reference points across London, New York and Singapore/Hong Kong, while constituent eligibility and weighting are reassessed during the June and December reviews.

Donald Trump Jr.’s 1789 Capital has agreed to lead a $1 billion Polymarket funding round with roughly $300 million that would value the prediction market platform at $21 billion.

Bloomberg first reported the new financing, while 1789 Capital spokeswoman Alexa Henning confirmed the investment details on Monday. The venture capital firm previously put approximately $200 million into Polymarket, which is currently valued at close to $15 billion.

The proposed financing would give Polymarket another sharp valuation increase after the company spent the past year raising capital from investors ranging from venture firms to established financial market operators.

1789 Capital deepens its investment in Polymarket

The new $300 million commitment would take 1789 Capital’s total disclosed investment in Polymarket to roughly $500 million across its funding rounds.

Trump Jr. is a partner at 1789 Capital and joined Polymarket’s advisory board last year following the firm’s earlier investment. At the time, crypto.news reported that the appointment came as Polymarket was working to restore access to the U.S. market after years of regulatory restrictions.

His involvement extends across competing prediction market companies. Trump Jr. joined Kalshi as an adviser last year and received company shares worth more than $300,000, according to the New York Times.

Speaking to the Times this year about his investments, Trump Jr. said he was acting as a private citizen and had “no policy position and no role within the administration whatsoever.”

1789 Capital itself has expanded quickly. The investment firm managed a few hundred million dollars two years ago but now oversees more than $3 billion.

Its portfolio has included private companies such as SpaceX, defense technology company Anduril, AI chipmaker Cerebras and artificial intelligence startup Reflection AI. Some companies backed by the firm hold large U.S. government contracts, while Polymarket has operated during a period of major changes in the federal approach to prediction markets.

Polymarket valuation has climbed above $20 billion

The $21 billion valuation attached to the planned round comes less than two weeks after reports that Polymarket was seeking capital at a valuation exceeding $20 billion.

Intercontinental Exchange CEO Jeff Sprecher said in August that the New York Stock Exchange parent could consider joining another Polymarket financing. ICE had accumulated a $1.64 billion stake in the company by March, while Sprecher said its relationship with Polymarket involved exchanging information and expertise.

The potential new ICE investment followed several large commitments from the exchange operator.

ICE announced an investment of up to $2 billion in October 2025, initially valuing Polymarket at $8 billion before the investment. The agreement gave ICE rights to distribute Polymarket’s event-driven data to institutional clients around the world.

In March, the NYSE parent invested another $600 million as part of that commitment. ICE said at the time that the funding formed part of Polymarket’s fundraising round and would not have a material effect on the exchange operator’s financial results or capital return plans.

Polymarket’s latest proposed valuation would be more than twice the $9 billion post-money valuation attached to the ICE transaction announced in October 2025.

Rival Kalshi has attracted large amounts of capital during the same period. The company raised $1 billion earlier this year at a $22 billion valuation as trading activity across event contracts expanded into sports, politics and other categories.

Prediction markets allow traders to take positions on whether specified events will occur. Contracts can cover elections and economic decisions as well as sports, entertainment and statements made by public figures.

Trump administration backs federal prediction market oversight

The new Polymarket financing comes while federal and state authorities continue to contest how prediction markets should be regulated in the United States.

President Donald Trump has backed federal oversight through the Commodity Futures Trading Commission and said prediction markets would “thrive” under his administration.

Michael S. Selig, appointed by Trump to lead the CFTC, has supported the industry while the regulator has challenged attempts by states to impose their own restrictions on federally regulated prediction markets.

In May, crypto.news reported that a proposed CFTC rule covering prediction-market event contracts had entered White House review as federal and state officials disputed which authorities should police the sector.

Kalshi and other operators have argued that event contracts offered through CFTC-regulated exchanges fall under the Commodity Exchange Act. Several states have disputed that position and pursued enforcement under their gambling laws.

The disagreement has reached federal courts, where judges have issued differing decisions over whether CFTC jurisdiction prevents states from enforcing gaming laws against prediction market operators.

Trump Jr.’s financial connections to the industry extend to both sides of the main competitive pairing. Along with his investment and advisory role at Polymarket, he serves as a strategic adviser to Kalshi.

Polymarket built a regulated route back into the US

Polymarket’s fundraising has accelerated after the company spent several years working to restore U.S. operations.

The platform stopped serving U.S. users following a 2022 settlement with the CFTC over allegations that it offered unregistered event-based binary options. Polymarket paid a $1.4 million civil penalty and agreed to restrict domestic access.

Its route back into the market began with the $112 million acquisition of QCEX in July 2025. The transaction gave Polymarket control of a CFTC-licensed designated contract market and derivatives clearing organization, providing regulated infrastructure for U.S. operations.

The CFTC later issued a no-action letter covering QCX and QC Clearing, giving Polymarket regulatory relief involving certain reporting and recordkeeping requirements for event contracts.

Polymarket subsequently began rebuilding its domestic business, initially through a separate regulated operation. The company now runs an international blockchain-based venue alongside its regulated U.S. exchange, which operates through the infrastructure acquired from QCEX.

The international platform settles markets using USDC on Polygon, while the U.S. operation requires identity verification and settles in dollars through approved intermediaries.

Competition with Kalshi has intensified as both companies have expanded their event-contract businesses. Polymarket once controlled more than 90% of monthly prediction-market notional volume in November 2024, though its share declined as Kalshi gained ground from September 2025 onward.

1789 Capital, meanwhile, has continued building its investment portfolio as its assets under management climbed above $3 billion. Trump Jr. told the Times that his investment activities were separate from the administration and that he held no government policy role.

Chainalysis Government Solutions has expanded its legal challenge against a $94.66 million blockchain analytics contract that U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement awarded to TRM Labs.

A redacted complaint made public on Aug. 28 details seven claims against the U.S. government. Chainalysis alleges that ICE improperly avoided an open competition and evaluated potential suppliers against requirements that it did not fully disclose.

The filing represents Chainalysis’s account of the procurement. ICE and TRM Labs are contesting the case, and the U.S. Court of Federal Claims has not found that either party acted improperly.

Chainalysis says ICE changed its evaluation criteria

ICE awarded contract 70CMSD26C00000005 to TRM Labs on July 1. The one-year agreement runs through June 30, 2027 and covers forensic software and support for Homeland Security Task Force investigations.

The work includes blockchain tracing, scam disruption, cybercrime investigations and support for sextortion cases. TRM Labs later joined the lawsuit as a defendant-intervenor, allowing it to defend the award alongside the government.

Chainalysis’s first three claims focus on how ICE defined and evaluated its requirements. The company argues that its capability statement addressed every requirement in ICE’s final Statement of Need. It therefore disputes ICE’s determination that TRM was the only responsible source able to perform the work.

Chainalysis also alleges that ICE relied on an earlier Request for Information when deciding whether another supplier could qualify. The company says several requirements from that document did not appear in the final Statement of Need against which vendors were told to prepare their submissions.

Those disputed requirements included access to a proprietary scam-reporting database containing more than one million records, automated notifications to virtual asset service providers and operational partnerships with stablecoin issuers.

The seven claims target ICE’s sole-source process

The fourth claim alleges that ICE failed to give Chainalysis’s capability statement meaningful consideration. ICE published its notice of intent on June 8 and required responses by June 11.

Interested suppliers could submit only one page, although the Statement of Need itself ran for roughly one and a half pages and covered three operational areas. Chainalysis says ICE asked no follow-up questions before completing its market research report the following day.

The complaint states that ICE’s report recognized both companies as having mature investigative platforms and artificial intelligence integration. It also allegedly recognized that both could deploy cleared personnel. However, ICE concluded that Chainalysis lacked other capabilities needed for the program.

Chainalysis disputes that assessment. It argues that the short response period, one-page restriction and absence of follow-up questions turned the capability review into a “mere formality.” That wording reflects the company’s allegation, not a court finding.

The fifth claim concerns allegedly restrictive specifications. Chainalysis says questions about automated asset freezes, stablecoin partnerships and the size of a victim-reporting database closely matched TRM products or commercial arrangements.

Chainalysis claims it offered alternative methods that could achieve the same investigative goals. The complaint says ICE’s justification did not explain why those alternatives were insufficient.

Chainalysis challenges ICE’s legal authority

The sixth claim addresses ICE’s use of the federal government’s Revolutionary FAR Overhaul rules. Chainalysis argues that ICE relied on a “unique capabilities” rationale found in an older version of federal acquisition regulations but omitted from the rules governing this procurement.

Current acquisition rules allow an agency to avoid full and open competition when only one responsible source can meet its needs. They also require consideration of capability statements and prohibit agencies from using inadequate planning to justify limited competition.

Chainalysis’s seventh claim focuses on that planning requirement. The company notes that ICE issued its information request on May 28, received a 20-page response from Chainalysis on June 2 and announced its planned sole-source award six days later.

ICE then closed the capability-statement period on June 11 and completed its market research report on June 12. Chainalysis argues that this timetable left too little time to reconcile the different requirements or assess alternative suppliers.

The government may argue that ICE reasonably concluded TRM alone could meet its operational requirements. The merits of that position remain for the court to decide.

The September 2 hearing could determine the contract

Chainalysis wants the court to declare the award unlawful, permanently stop performance and direct ICE to conduct a full and open competition. It also seeks legal costs under the Equal Access to Justice Act.

A successful challenge would not automatically transfer the contract to Chainalysis. The court could instead require ICE to reconsider its analysis, reopen competition or prepare a legally sufficient sole-source justification. It could also deny the requested injunction and leave the TRM contract in place.

Judge Stephen S. Schwartz has placed the case on an expedited schedule. Oral argument is set for Sept. 2 at 10 a.m. EDT in Washington, D.C. The government has asked for a ruling by Sept. 10, although the court is not bound by that requested date.

As crypto.news previously reported, the contract supports a growing federal reliance on private blockchain-intelligence providers. Both companies have worked with law-enforcement agencies, and both contributed tracing support to a $701 million international asset-freezing operation.

In related coverage, Chainalysis recently produced 14,300 investigative leads from cryptocurrency activity connected to suspected child-abuse networks. The ICE dispute now asks the court to decide whether the government followed procurement law when choosing which provider would support another major investigative program.

Crypto hacks increased sharply in August, although the estimated value stolen fell by nearly half compared with July, according to blockchain security company PeckShield.

PeckShield eported on Sept. 1 that it recorded 50 major incidents during August. That was a 67% increase from the 30 incidents counted in July.

Estimated losses reached $136.3 million, down 49.5% from approximately $270 million in July. The figures represent PeckShield’s estimates and may change as affected projects investigate transactions, freeze assets or recover funds.

The Tectonic lending incident dominated the month, accounting for approximately $74 million, or more than half of PeckShield’s total.

Crypto hacks became more frequent but less costly

The August figures show a growing number of attacks with losses concentrated in one large incident. Excluding Tectonic, the remaining 49 incidents generated estimated combined losses of about $62.3 million.

PeckShield identified Moonwell as the second-largest incident at $8.7 million. Term Labs followed at $8.5 million, while Coinsbuy and TAC recorded estimated losses of $7.9 million and $7.5 million, respectively.

Other named incidents included Injective at $4.8 million, MANTRA at $3.6 million, BounceBit at $3 million and Cosmos Labs at $2.87 million. Aquifer completed PeckShield’s top ten with an estimated $2.47 million loss.

These figures should not be treated as final net losses. Security firms can classify incidents differently, particularly when funds remain traceable, frozen or recoverable. Projects may also revise their estimates after completing technical reviews.

A recent CoinGecko study found that crypto platforms lost $3.63 billion across 245 incidents between January 2025 and July 2026. The ten largest incidents accounted for more than 72.5% of that estimate, showing how a few major attacks can shape monthly totals.

Tectonic represented more than half of August losses

Tectonic disclosed an incident affecting its Cronos-based lending protocol on Aug. 30 and warned users not to interact with the platform while its team investigated.

Security researchers estimated that an attacker manipulated collateral pricing and borrowed assets worth approximately $74 million. Tectonic has not published a final loss figure or complete technical report, meaning the estimate remains subject to revision.

PeckShield classified the Tectonic incident as the fourth-largest cryptocurrency theft recorded during 2026. It ranked behind attacks involving Drift, KelpDAO and LayerZero, and hardware-wallet provider Coldcard.

Crypto.com CEO Kris Marszalek confirmed that the incident affected Tectonic rather than Crypto.com’s centralized exchange or app. He said the company’s security team was assisting the Cronos investigation.

As crypto.news previously reported, Crypto.com customer funds remained unaffected because the breach concerned a separate decentralized protocol operating on Cronos.

Cronos halted before most assets left the network

Cronos validators stopped block production after detecting the active exploit. Independent address analysis and PeckShield’s tracking indicated that the attacker moved approximately $6 million to Ethereum before the halt.

Most of the remaining identified assets stayed on Cronos. Funds remaining on the affected network were not necessarily recovered at that point, but the halt prevented additional transactions from receiving confirmation.

Cronos later resumed block production after validators restored the network to a state preceding the exploit. Blocks restarted at 23:49:01 UTC from block 90,896,189, according to the network’s update.

Node operators were directed to install Cronos version 1.7.8 and use a mainnet snapshot taken before the incident. The decision effectively removed transactions included during the discarded section of the chain.

The rollback raises questions about transactions made by unrelated users during that period. Cronos has not yet provided a complete accounting of which transfers, trades or liquidations were reversed.

PeckShield said the attacker had started moving part of the assets that reached other networks. The security company reported an initial conversion toward Bitcoin, but the amount remains small compared with the funds originally associated with the attack.

Investigations and recovery efforts remain open

Cronos and Tectonic are expected to publish a full post-incident report explaining the exploit, validator response and network restoration. Neither project has provided a publication date.

Tectonic has also not announced a repayment or compensation plan for affected depositors. Any recoverable amount will depend on the status of assets remaining on Cronos and whether exchanges or bridge operators can restrict funds moved elsewhere.

August also included network disruptions unrelated to Tectonic. MANTRA resumed block production after deploying a software update addressing a Cosmos-EVM vulnerability. The project said two team-managed wallets were affected while user balances remained unchanged.

PeckShield’s next monthly calculation could change if protocols recover assets or revise their reported exposure. For now, its dataset shows that attacks became more frequent in August even as the estimated amount lost declined sharply.

Cathie Wood’s Ark Invest has bought about $37.4 million worth of Block Inc. shares after the Jack Dorsey-led fintech company fell nearly 2% in Monday trading.

According to Ark Invest’s latest trading disclosure, the investment manager purchased 456,059 Block shares across three of its actively managed exchange-traded funds as it increased its exposure to the fintech company following another decline in its stock.

The Monetary Authority of Singapore has proposed amendments to the Payment Services Act 2019 that would put its stablecoin framework into law while introducing rules for overseas issuers, interest payments and issuer wind-down plans.

MAS published the consultation on Sept. 1, seeking feedback on how issuers can qualify under its Single-Currency Stablecoin framework and use the “MAS-regulated stablecoin” label. Responses are due by Oct. 16.

The proposals would implement a framework first finalized in 2023, while extending it to areas that have developed as stablecoins have gained a larger role in payments and tokenized financial markets.

MAS stablecoin rules could cover joint overseas issuance

One of the main proposals would allow a stablecoin jointly issued by a Singapore entity and a foreign issuer to qualify as an MAS-regulated stablecoin, provided risks linked to issuing the token across different jurisdictions are sufficiently addressed.

MAS is seeking views on how such multi-jurisdiction arrangements should operate under the framework.

The regulator is considering a separate route for a limited number of stablecoins issued entirely outside Singapore. Foreign tokens could be recognized when they are supervised under a regulatory framework that MAS considers comparable to Singapore’s regime.

Recognition would focus on cross-border wholesale uses, according to the consultation.

The proposals extend work that began in October 2022, when MAS first consulted on rules for single-currency stablecoins. The regulator published its response to industry feedback in August 2023 and established requirements covering reserve assets, capital, redemption and disclosure.

As crypto.news previously reported, the framework applies to single-currency stablecoins issued in Singapore and pegged to the Singapore dollar or a G10 currency. Issuers that meet the required standards can seek recognition for their tokens as MAS-regulated stablecoins.

Stablecoins outside that framework would continue to be treated as Digital Payment Tokens under the Payment Services Act. DPT consumer safeguards include restrictions on trading incentives, financing and leverage, along with limits on locally issued credit card payments.

Singapore has separately tightened rules for crypto businesses providing DPT services. MAS imposed restrictions on incentives and credit-funded crypto trading as part of consumer protection measures introduced after earlier consultations.

MAS proposes interest ban and stress testing

The Sept. 1 consultation proposes new safeguards for issuers seeking the MAS-regulated designation, including a prohibition on paying interest on regulated stablecoins.

Issuers would have to conduct stress tests and maintain plans for recovery and an orderly wind-down if their businesses encounter financial or operational problems.

MAS is seeking feedback on consumer safeguards covering money received from customers before stablecoins are issued. The proposed protections would be similar to requirements that already apply to licensees operating under the Payment Services Act.

Existing core requirements would remain part of the regime. Issuers would need to comply with standards covering value stability, capital, redemption at par and disclosures to users.

Only licensed issuers operating under the framework would be permitted to describe themselves as licensed MAS-regulated stablecoin issuers or market qualifying tokens as “MAS-regulated stablecoins.”

The designation is intended to distinguish qualifying tokens from other cryptocurrencies marketed as stablecoins without being subject to the same MAS requirements for maintaining their value.

MAS Deputy Managing Director for Financial Supervision Ho Hern Shin said the legislative changes would establish regulatory guardrails for stablecoins that meet the regulator’s requirements for value stability and governance.

“Trusted and well-regulated stablecoins can serve as a credible settlement asset in tokenised financial markets, while mitigating risks to users and the broader financial system,” Ho said.

Stablecoins are moving into Singapore payment systems

The legislative consultation comes as regulated stablecoins are being tested in payment and settlement projects involving financial institutions operating in Singapore.

On Aug. 25, Visa joined the MAS-led BLOOM initiative and selected Nium for a stablecoin settlement pilot involving regulated U.S. dollar and euro-backed tokens. The companies plan to test settlement seven days a week, including weekends and public holidays, across cross-border payment flows.

MAS introduced BLOOM in 2025 to develop settlement arrangements using tokenized bank liabilities and regulated stablecoins. The program covers domestic and cross-border payments, multi-currency settlement and institutional applications such as trade finance and corporate treasury operations.

The initiative followed Project Orchid, under which MAS explored programmable money and potential applications for a digital Singapore dollar through more than 10 trials. Participants in BLOOM have included Circle, DBS, OCBC, Partior, Stripe and UOB.

Stablecoins have moved into retail payment channels as well. OKX Singapore introduced a stablecoin payment service in September 2025 that lets customers use USDT and USDC at merchants accepting GrabPay.

Payments through the service are converted for settlement in Singapore dollars, with StraitsX’s XSGD used as a bridge. Merchants receive local currency while the corresponding amount is deducted from a customer’s stablecoin balance.

Singapore has spent years developing stablecoin oversight

MAS established the main structure of its single-currency stablecoin regime in 2023 after reviewing responses to its earlier consultation.

The framework set standards for reserve management and value stability while requiring issuers to maintain minimum capital and liquid assets. Redemption requirements were designed to allow users to redeem qualifying stablecoins at par, while disclosure rules covered matters including the mechanisms used to keep a token’s value stable.

Only issuers satisfying the full set of requirements can receive the MAS-regulated stablecoin designation.

Singapore has since licensed companies involved in digital asset payments under the Payment Services Act. Paxos Digital Singapore received full MAS approval in 2024, with DBS selected to provide stablecoin custody services for the company.

The regulator has continued granting licenses to crypto companies that meet its requirements while taking action against firms that fail to comply with local rules. Cumberland SG secured a Major Payment Institution license in July 2026, permitting the company to provide regulated digital payment token and cross-border money transfer services in Singapore.

Under the latest consultation, MAS is asking interested parties to submit comments on the proposed Payment Services Act amendments and related stablecoin policy positions by Oct. 16, 2026.