DD
MM
YYYY

PAGES

DD
MM
YYYY

spot_img

PAGES

Home Blog Page 9

Paul Atkins Emphasizes That Certain Crypto Assets Fall Within Securities and Application of Exemption for Innovative Contracts

0

In March 2026, the SEC in coordination with the CFTC released interpretive guidance under Project Crypto that introduces a token taxonomy for digital assets. It clarifies how the federal securities laws—and specifically the Howey investment contract test—apply or don’t apply to crypto.

The framework divides crypto assets into categories, with most falling outside securities regulation: Value comes from functional, decentralized networks rather than promoters’ efforts. Digital collectibles is designed for collection, use, or enjoyment like many NFTs or gaming items.

Digital tools provide practical utility or access like software and tools, event access, memberships. Payment stablecoins, those qualifying under the GENIUS Act or similar characteristics. Only digital securities— essentially traditional securities like stocks or bonds that are tokenized on a blockchain. These remain under SEC oversight regardless of the technology.

Chairman Atkins emphasized that this acknowledges what the prior administration refused to recognize, most crypto assets are not themselves securities. The SEC is no longer the securities and everything commission. The guidance also addresses when a non-security token might temporarily fall under an investment contract and how that can end with sufficient decentralization.

Atkins emphasizes a principles-based approach rooted in the core mission of the SEC: protecting investors, maintaining fair and orderly markets, and facilitating capital formation. He has criticized prior regulation through enforcement practices as opaque and overly aggressive, instead pushing for clear, upfront guidance and rules developed through notice-and-comment processes.

This is interpretive guidance not a formal rule yet, grounded in existing law, and aims to provide long-sought clarity after years of uncertainty. A more detailed ~400-page Regulation Crypto Assets proposal with safe harbors is expected soon. Separately, the SEC is actively weighing and has previewed an innovation exemption; sometimes called a limited or modest exemption for on-chain trading of tokenized securities. This would allow:

Issuers to tokenize traditional securities. Limited trading on blockchain platforms via automated market makers or decentralized liquidity mechanisms. Collaboration with specialist transfer agents to whitelist holders for compliant on-chain activity. It’s framed as an incremental, time-scope-limited sandbox to enable experimentation by both TradFi firms and crypto-native players, while developing longer-term rules.

In his first year, the SEC under Atkins has approved multiple crypto-related ETFs, ended several enforcement actions against crypto firms, and shifted toward greater transparency. Atkins has been a consistent supporter of the crypto industry, including through roles like co-chair of the Token Alliance part of the Chamber of Digital Commerce since 2017. He views crypto as a key area of American innovation and has pushed to bring development back onshore by creating a predictable, innovation-friendly environment rather than driving activity offshore.

Atkins has indicated it could arrive in the coming weeks/months as part of broader efforts to adapt securities rules to on-chain capital markets. This fits Atkins’ “A-C-T” strategy (Advance, Clarify, Transform) for modernizing regulation, reducing friction for innovation, and focusing the SEC on actual securities while coordinating better with the CFTC on commodities.

These moves represent a pro-clarity, innovation-friendly pivot compared to prior enforcement-heavy approaches. They don’t eliminate all oversight—fraud, manipulation, and actual securities still get enforced—but they draw clearer lines, potentially unlocking more on-chain activity, RWAs, and institutional participation.

The full details are in the SEC’s March 2026 interpretive release and Atkins’ speeches. Markets and industry have generally viewed this positively as a step toward regulatory certainty in the U.S.

Anthropic Visit to White House According to Trump Could Lead to Reversal of its Pentagon Blacklist

0

In a CNBC Squawk Box interview, Trump stated that Anthropic representatives visited the White House recently for very good talks, adding:

And I think they’re shaping up. They’re very smart, and I think they can be of great use. I like smart people… I think we’ll get along with them just fine. When asked if a Pentagon deal was possible, he replied, It’s possible. We want the smartest people.

The dispute began earlier in 2026 when the Trump administration directed federal agencies to stop using Anthropic’s technology primarily its Claude models. The Pentagon then designated Anthropic a supply-chain risk, a label typically used for foreign threats, which restricted its use in defense contracting. This stemmed from clashes over AI guardrails

Anthropic pushed for restrictions on certain military applications, such as fully autonomous weapons and mass domestic surveillance of Americans even though existing U.S. law and Pentagon policies already prohibit some of these. The company has long emphasized Constitutional AI and safety principles, with CEO Dario Amodei highlighting risks from advanced AI lowering barriers to destructive acts.

The Pentagon insisted on unrestricted access for all lawful purposes and viewed corporate-imposed limits as unacceptable interference in military operations. Anthropic sued to block the blacklist, with mixed court results: a California judge issued a temporary halt, but the D.C. Circuit allowed the designation to stand while expediting review. The blacklist was a significant blow, potentially costing the company billions and affecting partners like Amazon and Microsoft in defense work.

Trump’s remarks signal a potential reversal following the White House meeting described by officials as productive and constructive. A key catalyst appears to be Anthropic’s recent Mythos model, noted for strong capabilities in cybersecurity vulnerability detection and exploitation—areas of high value for national security and defense.

Prediction markets like Polymarket have shown rising odds around 60-76% in recent snapshots of a deal with the Pentagon by June 30, 2026. In the meantime, reports indicate the Pentagon shifted some work to alternatives like OpenAI. This fits a pattern of the administration prioritizing rapid AI acceleration and U.S. technological edge especially vs. competitors like China over stringent private-sector safety constraints on military use.

Anthropic’s shaping up comment suggests pragmatic negotiations: the company may need to relax or clarify some guardrails to regain access, while still emphasizing safety and cybersecurity collaboration. It’s a classic tension in AI governance—who sets the rules for dual-use technology: companies with self-imposed ethical frameworks, or the government and military demanding flexibility for defense needs.

Claude is known for its helpfulness, reduced hallucination tendencies via techniques like Constitutional AI, strong performance in coding, reasoning, vision, and agentic workflows, and a focus on being steerable and aligned with human values. As of 2026, recent releases include Claude Opus 4.7; strong in coding, agents, vision, and complex tasks and tools like Claude Code, Claude Cowork, Claude Design, and agent features.

Claude powers millions of users and has gained significant traction in enterprise and developer workflows. The company also conducts research in areas like scaling laws, interpretability, reinforcement learning from human feedback (RLHF), and economic impacts of AI.

Trump’s smart people framing prioritizes capability and utility, which aligns with his broader push for American AI dominance. The situation remains fluid—lawsuits are ongoing, and any final deal would likely involve detailed agreements on usage. If it resolves, it could ease pressure on Anthropic while giving the DoD broader access to frontier models.

Polymarket Diving into Perp Futures for Long and Short Assets Trading 

0

Polymarket announced they’re launching perpetual futures (perps), letting users go long or short on assets; crypto like BTC, equities like NVDA, commodities like gold with leverage at least 10x mentioned in reports, 24/7, no expiry. We price the future, Now you can lever it. It’s a direct expansion beyond binary event contracts.

This move and Kalshi racing them on similar perps plans shows smart business: Prediction markets excel at high-conviction, event-driven pricing—crowd wisdom on discrete outcomes with clear resolution. Perps shine for continuous directional trading, leverage, and scalping without waiting for expiry.

Perps are a monster volume driver in crypto; on-chain perps did hundreds of billions monthly. Prediction markets have massive engagement spikes (elections, big events) but can be lumpy. Adding 24/7 levered trading on known markets keeps users sticky and multiplies activity.

You can already express nuanced views on Polymarket. Perps let you lever those convictions or hedge them indefinitely. High-frequency traders get micro-edges amplified; conviction holders get size without tying up huge capital in illiquid binaries. Kalshi’s crypto push forced their hand.

Both are evolving from event betting toward fuller trading platforms. Polymarket’s user base, hundreds of thousands MAU + perps could challenge pure perp DEXs like Hyperliquid in certain flows. Perps aren’t eating prediction markets. Perps are great for ongoing price exposure but they suck at many things prediction markets handle cleanly:

Binary or multi-outcome events (election winner, “will this bill pass”, sports results, obscure news). Information aggregation on low-liquidity or narrative-driven stuff where expiry forces resolution. Pure “will this happen?” conviction without constant funding rates or liquidation drama.

Perps can approximate some of this like event-linked perps, but the mechanics differ—funding rates, margin, no natural resolution. Prediction markets are basically event derivatives with built-in oracle resolution. They’re complementary: perps for flow and leverage, preds for discovery and truth-seeking on real-world outcomes.

Crypto history shows this pattern—DEXs added perps for volume, but spot, options, and niche products including event contracts still grew. Polymarket isn’t pivoting; they’re layering a high-margin, high-engagement product on their core strength; pricing the future via crowd bets. Derivatives keep winning because speculation is sticky, leverage amplifies everything, and platforms want to own more of the user’s wallet and time.

The launch comes amid intense competition with Kalshi another prediction market platform also eyeing perps and crypto trading. Polymarket appears to have beaten Kalshi to the public announcement, escalating a rivalry in both event-based and continuous derivatives. It aligns with Polymarket’s broader growth: Explosive volume in 2025–2026, fueled by high-profile events like elections and geopolitical news.

Reports of ambitious fundraising: aiming for ~$400M at a potential $15 billion valuation. Regulatory progress, including CFTC-related developments, positioning it for U.S. and global expansion while staying crypto-friendly. But calling it perp over prediction market is like saying options killed spot trading. Both thrive when the underlying; real events, price discovery is interesting. Prediction markets proved they can pull real money and attention on big macro and political calls.

Perps will probably boost Polymarket’s overall volume and make it a stickier app. Expect more hybrid stuff: levered event exposure, perpetual prediction-like contracts, etc. Bullish for the whole ecosystem—more tools for expressing views on the future, whether discrete or continuous.

Germany’s Johann Wadephul Rejected Proposals for Broad Sanctions Against Israel

0

German Foreign Minister Johann Wadephul rejected proposals for broad or far-reaching EU sanctions against Israel, including suspension of the EU-Israel Association Agreement, during an EU foreign ministers’ meeting in Luxembourg.

Several EU countries—particularly Spain, Ireland, and Slovenia—pushed for a debate on suspending or partially limiting the EU’s association agreement with Israel. This pact provides preferential trade access and broader cooperation. Critics cited concerns over Israel’s military operations in Gaza, actions in Lebanon, and settlement policies in the West Bank, describing some conduct as unacceptable.

Germany and Italy blocked the move. Wadephul called broad measures like withdrawing free trade benefits inappropriate and instead advocated for critical, constructive dialogue with Israel on key issues. He emphasized talking directly rather than punitive steps. The proposal lacked the needed support; full suspension requires unanimity; partial measures need a qualified majority, which Germany and Italy helped prevent.

The meeting highlighted deep EU divisions on the Middle East. Other ideas, such as targeted sanctions on extremist Israeli settlers or individuals, were discussed separately but not the focus of this rejection. Signed in the 1990s and upgraded over time, it covers trade, political dialogue, and cooperation.

Suspending it would be a significant escalation, affecting economic ties, Israel is an important EU partner in tech, security, and research. Past EU actions have included sanctions on violent settlers and criticism of policies, but broad trade penalties have faced resistance from countries like Germany, Italy, Hungary, and the Czech Republic, who favor engagement over isolation.

Germany has long viewed Israel’s security as a core interest, shaped by historical responsibility post-Holocaust. Successive governments including under the current foreign minister have supported Israel’s right to self-defense while criticizing specific policies, such as settlement expansion or humanitarian access issues in Gaza.

Wadephul’s comments align with preferring diplomacy and dialogue over sanctions that could undermine a two-state solution or regional stability. Earlier foreign minister Annalena Baerbock had expressed similar caution on broad measures while occasionally supporting targeted sanctions on extremists.

This outcome reflects ongoing EU splits: some member states push for stronger pressure on Israel amid the humanitarian situation and conflicts, while others prioritize strategic partnership, countering Iran/Hezbollah threats, and avoiding measures they see as one-sided or ineffective.

Successive governments, including under former Chancellor Olaf Scholz and current Chancellor Friedrich Merz have repeatedly stated that Germany stands by Israel, especially after the October 7, 2023, Hamas attacks. Official statements emphasize that no state can tolerate terrorist attacks involving murder, kidnapping, and torture, and that Germany’s historical legacy makes solidarity with Israel non-negotiable.

Germany advocates for a negotiated peace leading to an independent, democratic, and viable Palestinian state living alongside Israel in peace and security. Recognition of Palestinian statehood is viewed as a final step after direct negotiations, not a unilateral move. Berlin criticizes Israeli settlement expansion in the West Bank as a violation of international law and an obstacle to peace.

Germany has rejected accusations that Israel’s actions in Gaza constitute genocide, describing them instead as self-defense. It has opposed efforts to characterize the conflict in those terms. No major new sanctions were adopted; the focus remains on dialogue and possible narrower measures.

Russia Lower Parliament Approves the Digital Currency and Digital Rights Bill

0

Russia’s State Duma, lower house of parliament just approved the On Digital Currency and Digital Rights bill in its first reading on April 21, 2026. This is not final passage into law yet—Russia’s legislative process requires second and third readings in the Duma, then approval by the Federation Council and the President’s signature.

The bill is on track for full adoption by July 1, 2026, with enforcement elements possibly rolling out later. Digital assets are legally recognized as property. Owners can defend them in court, include them in bankruptcy, inheritance, or divorce proceedings. Domestic use still strictly banned. The ruble and eventually the digital ruble remains the only legal tender for payments inside Russia.

Cross-border and foreign trade settlements: This is the big shift. Businesses and companies can use approved cryptocurrencies for international trade payments, including for goods, services, securities, intellectual property, etc. It’s explicitly designed to help bypass Western sanctions by providing an alternative to restricted banking channels.

The Bank of Russia (CBR) gets strong oversight. It will license intermediaries, exchanges, brokers, custodians, approve or ban specific assets and transactions, and set strict rules. Transactions without licensed Russian intermediaries are generally prohibited. Non-qualified investors face caps around 300,000 rubles/~$3,800 annually after risk tests. Qualified and professional players have fewer restrictions.

Residents must notify tax authorities about foreign crypto wallets and transactions. Reports indicate the CBR will maintain a whitelist of approved cryptocurrencies based on strict criteria: high average market cap, high daily trading volume >1 trillion rubles, and a long trading history.

Bitcoin and Ethereum  are widely expected to qualify first, along with possibly a few others like SOL, BNB, or TRON. No broad free-for-all—only top-tier liquid assets initially. This formalizes what Russian exporters and importers especially in oil, grain, metals, have already been doing informally or experimentally to keep trade flowing with partners in Asia, Middle East, Africa, and elsewhere despite sanctions.

Bullish for adoption, It gives crypto real utility in global trade and sanctions circumvention. Russia has been pushing this direction for years; experimental regimes started earlier, mining legalized in 2024, etc. Other sanctioned or BRICS-adjacent countries may watch closely. Domestic ban stays firm, and heavy regulation and centralized control remains. It’s pragmatic crypto as a tool under state oversight, not libertarian decentralization.

Markets are reacting positively today to the news, with talk of structural demand for BTC/ETH from Russian trade flows. But remember, this is still early-stage legislation—full effects depend on implementation details, whitelisting, and how counterparties abroad engage. Russia is turning sanctions pressure into a feature for crypto integration in foreign trade.

It’s a meaningful step toward mainstreaming digital assets in international settlements, even if tightly controlled. If you’re trading or holding $BTC/$ETH, this adds another layer of nation-state utility narrative on top of existing institutional momentum. Keep an eye on the next readings for confirmation.

For Russia, it provides a practical workaround for sanctioned trade. Crypto offers pseudonymous, borderless settlement without relying on traditional dollar-based rails. It adds another large economy with real trade volume legitimizing and potentially increasing demand for BTC, ETH, and other assets in real-world international commerce. This fits a pattern of countries exploring crypto for de-dollarization or sanctions evasion.

It’s not full crypto legalization as money inside Russia. Capital controls, tax reporting including foreign wallets, and penalties for unlicensed activity are tightening alongside this. Implementation details especially national security aspects of cross-border flows remain somewhat opaque.

This is still in the legislative process — first reading is progress, but amendments and second and third readings could tweak it. Markets often react positively to such headlines as signals of growing institutional adoption, though actual on-the-ground impact will depend on how quickly the Central Bank operationalizes licensing and approvals.