Welcome to the PMBug forums - a watering hole for folks interested in gold, silver, precious metals, sound money, investing, market and economic news, central bank monetary policies, politics and more.
Why not register an account and join the discussions? When you register an account and log in, you may enjoy additional benefits including no Google ads, market data/charts, access to trade/barter with the community and much more. Registering an account is free - you have nothing to lose!
Trump pardons founder of Silk Road website
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump announced Tuesday that he had pardoned Ross Ulbricht, the founder of Silk Road, an underground website for selling drugs.
Ulbricht had been sentenced to life in prison in 2015 after a high-profile prosecution that highlighted the role of the internet in illegal markets.
More:
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...S&cvid=7408b4375db74356bb2694e607b107e5&ei=11
Edit to add:
Yes.
Ethereum vs Solana: A Battle for Smart-Contract Supremacy
Ethereum & Solana are prominent blockchains, each hosting native cryptocurrencies. Know more about differences in speed, transaction speed, scalability, feesatomicwallet.io
I also posted a lot of information about Solana here:
...
Speaking to Cointelegraph at Solana’s annual Breakpoint conference in Amsterdam, the co-founder recounts a late-night brainwave of a “hyper-optimized, fast as possible” smart contract blockchain protocol.
“The use case that I was going after was for central limit order books, like how to run something that’s like the Nasdaq, but on a public permissionless blockchain,” Yakovenko explains.
Solana’s roots are intrinsically linked to Yakovenko’s journey as a computer engineer. Having spent the majority of his career at Qualcomm in San Diego alongside co-founder Raj Gokal, Yakovenko’s...
- pmbug
- Replies: 25
- Forum: Cryptocurrency Bug
That was an excellent article, thanks. ...
I own positions with a number of coins and I keep tabs on them pretty much daily. This is my current thinking on them (FWIW - DYODD):
- ...
- Ethereum (ETH) - Second mover is first mover in the Proof of Stake (POS) evolution powering smart contracts, DeFi and other developments. ETFs helped secure 400lb gorilla status, but the network has limitations that will be difficult to fix natively (which is why there are a plethora of L2 networks piggybacking on Ethereum). I suspect in time, Ethereum is going to be surpassed by a technically superior network. That's probably a few years away though and Ethereum is likely going to do well until then.
- Solana (SOL) - First major challenger to Ethereum's POS crown. Technically superior to ETH, but it also has some issues as evidenced by a few periods of network failures. Rumors of SOL ETFs are in the works and Solana should do very well for many years.
- ...
- SUI (SUI) - A strong challenger for Solana (SOL) and Ethereum (ETH), SUI is technically superior to both of them (faster, cheaper, more efficient, scales better). SUI has been outperforming most alts and is currently trading just under it's ATH.
- ...
- MultiversX (EGLD) - The most technically superior network that I'm aware of at the moment. It's my sleeper pick to eventually end up challenging SUI, SOL and ETH for the top dog status as the foundation layer for DeFi, smart contracts, etc.
- ...
Some crypto use cases:
- ...
- Currency and Decentralized Finance (DeFi) - ETH, SOL, SUI, EGLD, XRP, XLM et al are vying to become the 800lb gorilla of real cryptocurrency adoption. Ethereum (ETH) ran out to a commanding lead, but has technical problems hindering further growth as a currency. Solana (SOL) looked to take Ethereum's crown, but has suffered some technical challenges of it's own. Newer challengers including SUI and MultiversX (EGLD) are innovating and coming to market with improvements in scalability, efficiency and cost.
- ...
...I personally think Solana (SOL), SUI and MultiversX (EGLD) are going to continue battling for developer attention as they compete with each other for essentially the same use cases. I swapped out my Ethereum recently. I could be wrong, but I think the three challengers (SOL, SUI, EGLD) are going to continue eating into it's market share. I think it's likely that SOL wins the 2025 leg of the race, SUI takes over in 2026 and EGLD eventually takes over in 2027 or beyond.
...
Saw this just now and it made me laugh:
It's actually a nice way to visualize the issue though. AFAIK, Cardano is outclassed by SUI and EGLD and possibly others at the moment, but Cardano peeps are trying to punch up with their marketing.
Presidential Actions
STRENGTHENING AMERICAN LEADERSHIP
IN DIGITAL FINANCIAL TECHNOLOGY
EXECUTIVE ORDER
January 23, 2025
By the authority vested in me as President by the Constitution and the laws of the United States of America, and in order to promote United States leadership in digital assets and financial technology while protecting economic liberty, it is hereby ordered as follows:
Section 1. Purpose and Policies. (a) The digital asset industry plays a crucial role in innovation and economic development in the United States, as well as our Nation’s international leadership. It is therefore the policy of my Administration to support the responsible growth and use of digital assets, blockchain technology, and related technologies across all sectors of the economy, including by:
(i) protecting and promoting the ability of individual citizens and private-sector entities alike to access and use for lawful purposes open public blockchain networks without persecution, including the ability to develop and deploy software, to participate in mining and validating, to transact with other persons without unlawful censorship, and to maintain self-custody of digital assets;
(ii) promoting and protecting the sovereignty of the United States dollar, including through actions to promote the development and growth of lawful and legitimate dollar-backed stablecoins worldwide;
(iii) protecting and promoting fair and open access to banking services for all law-abiding individual citizens and private-sector entities alike;
(iv) providing regulatory clarity and certainty built on technology-neutral regulations, frameworks that account for emerging technologies, transparent decision making, and well-defined jurisdictional regulatory boundaries, all of which are essential to supporting a vibrant and inclusive digital economy and innovation in digital assets, permissionless blockchains, and distributed ledger technologies; and
(v) taking measures to protect Americans from the risks of Central Bank Digital Currencies (CBDCs), which threaten the stability of the financial system, individual privacy, and the sovereignty of the United States, including by prohibiting the establishment, issuance, circulation, and use of a CBDC within the jurisdiction of the United States.
Sec. 2. Definitions. (a) For the purpose of this order, the term “digital asset” refers to any digital representation of value that is recorded on a distributed ledger, including cryptocurrencies, digital tokens, and stablecoins.
(b) The term “blockchain” means any technology where data is:
(i) shared across a network to create a public ledger of verified transactions or information among network participants;
(ii) linked using cryptography to maintain the integrity of the public ledger and to execute other functions;
(iii) distributed among network participants in an automated fashion to concurrently update network participants on the state of the public ledger and any other functions; and
(iv) composed of source code that is publicly available.
(c) “Central Bank Digital Currency” means a form of digital money or monetary value, denominated in the national unit of account, that is a direct liability of the central bank.
Sec. 3. Revocation of Executive Order 14067 and Department of the Treasury Framework of July 7, 2022. (a) Executive Order 14067 of March 9, 2022 (Ensuring Responsible Development of Digital Assets) is hereby revoked.
(b) The Secretary of the Treasury is directed to immediately revoke the Department of the Treasury’s “Framework for International Engagement on Digital Assets,” issued on July 7, 2022.
(c) All policies, directives, and guidance issued pursuant to Executive Order 14067 and the Department of the Treasury’s Framework for International Engagement on Digital Assets are hereby rescinded or shall be rescinded by the Secretary of the Treasury, as appropriate, to the extent they are inconsistent with the provisions of this order.
(d) The Secretary of the Treasury shall take all appropriate measures to ensure compliance with the policies set forth in this order.
Sec. 4. Establishment of the President‘s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets. (a) There is hereby established within the National Economic Council the President’s Working Group on Digital Asset Markets (Working Group). The Working Group shall be chaired by the Special Advisor for AI and Crypto (Chair). In addition to the Chair, the Working Group shall include the following officials, or their designees:
(i) the Secretary of the Treasury;
(ii) the Attorney General;
(iii) the Secretary of Commerce;
(iv) the Secretary of Homeland Security;
(v) the Director of the Office of Management and Budget;
(vi) the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs;
(vii) the Assistant to the President for National Economic Policy (APEP);
(viii) the Assistant to the President for Science and Technology;
(ix) the Homeland Security Advisor;
(x) the Chairman of the Securities and Exchange Commission; and
(xi) the Chairman of the Commodity Futures Trading
Commission.
(xii) As appropriate and consistent with applicable law, the Chair may invite the heads of other executive departments and agencies (agencies), or other senior officials within the Executive Office of the President, to attend meetings of the Working Group, based on the relevance of their expertise and responsibilities.
(b) Within 30 days of the date of this order, the Department of the Treasury, the Department of Justice, the Securities and Exchange Commission, and other relevant agencies, the heads of which are included in the Working Group, shall identify all regulations, guidance documents, orders, or other items that affect the digital asset sector. Within 60 days of the date of this order, each agency shall submit to the Chair recommendations with respect to whether each identified regulation, guidance document, order, or other item should be rescinded or modified, or, for items other than regulations, adopted in a regulation.
(c) Within 180 days of the date of this order, the Working Group shall submit a report to the President, through the APEP, which shall recommend regulatory and legislative proposals that advance the policies established in this order. In particular, the report shall focus on the following:
(i) The Working Group shall propose a Federal regulatory framework governing the issuance and operation of digital assets, including stablecoins, in the United States. The Working Group’s report shall consider provisions for market structure, oversight, consumer protection, and risk management.
(ii) The Working Group shall evaluate the potential creation and maintenance of a national digital asset stockpile and propose criteria for establishing such a stockpile, potentially derived from cryptocurrencies lawfully seized by the Federal Government through its law enforcement efforts.
(d) The Chair shall designate an Executive Director of the Working Group, who shall be responsible for coordinating its day-to-day functions. On issues affecting the national security, the Working Group shall consult with the National Security Council.
(e) As appropriate and consistent with law, the Working Group shall hold public hearings and receive individual expertise from leaders in digital assets and digital markets.
Sec. 5. Prohibition of Central Bank Digital Currencies.
(a) Except to the extent required by law, agencies are hereby prohibited from undertaking any action to establish, issue, or promote CBDCs within the jurisdiction of the United States or abroad.
(b) Except to the extent required by law, any ongoing plans or initiatives at any agency related to the creation of a CBDC within the jurisdiction of the United States shall be immediately terminated, and no further actions may be taken to develop or implement such plans or initiatives.
Sec. 6. Severability. (a) If any provision of this order, or the application of any provision to any person or circumstance, is held to be invalid, the remainder of this order and the application of its provisions to any other persons or circumstances shall not be affected thereby.
Sec. 7. General Provisions. (a) Nothing in this order shall be construed to impair or otherwise affect:
(i) the authority granted by law to an executive department, agency, or the head thereof; or
(ii) the functions of the Director of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budgetary, administrative, or legislative proposals.
(b) This order shall be implemented consistent with applicable law and subject to the availability of appropriations.
(c) This order is not intended to, and does not, create any right or benefit, substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by any party against the United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or agents, or any other person.
THE WHITE HOUSE,
January 23, 2025.
... There is speculation swirling that he might push for a "strategic reserve" of "made in USA" crypto. But what exactly is "made in USA" crypto? ...
Republicans are trying to repeal a tax-compliance rule that gives the Internal Revenue Service more information about some digital asset transactions, demonstrating the cryptocurrency industry’s growing clout.
The push from Sen. Ted Cruz (R., Texas) and Rep. Mike Carey (R., Ohio) uses a procedure that lets Congress strike down recent rules with simple-majority votes. They are trying to remove a December Biden administration rule that requires decentralized finance, or DeFi, platforms to report transactions to the government just like stock brokerages do and centralized crypto exchanges soon will.
Eliminating the tax rule is the industry’s priority for the first quarter, said Kristin Smith, chief executive officer of the Blockchain Association, a crypto trade group. Industry officials and pro-crypto lawmakers say the rule goes beyond congressional intent.
If successful, the Cruz-Carey effort would mark Congress’s first-ever repeal of a tax rule this way, and it would bar the government from creating a substantially similar regulation. ...
Commissioner Hester M. Peirce said:When I was a child, my family took an annual road trip from Ohio to Maine and back. It was a different era. No cell phones to call for help if something went wrong with the car. Paper maps and directions written on scraps of paper, instead of a phone app to give you step-by-step directions. Forget hopping on the web to book a hotel; you just had to look for signs in the distance and stop in to see if there was a vacancy. No podcasts or audiobooks, just a scratchy radio straining to find a local station. Instead of watching videos on screens in the back, my brothers and I were scanning passing cars’ license plates to “collect” the states in a no-tech road-trip game. Road trips are very different these days. In most ways, technology has made them a more enjoyable and less risky endeavor.
The crypto road trip on which the newly announced Crypto Task Force[1] has embarked likewise should be more enjoyable and less risky than the crypto road trip the Commission has taken the industry on for the last decade. On that last trip, the Commission refused to use regulatory tools at its disposal and incessantly slammed on the enforcement brakes as it lurched along a meandering route with a destination not discernible to anyone. But just as modern technology does not eliminate the risks of taking to the open road, this new journey toward regulatory clarity still presents dangers, and both the Commission and the public need to stay alert and aware of the risks and opportunities that may lie ahead. I am delighted to be accompanied on the journey by a wonderful team of talented SEC staff, and we look forward to engaging with many enthusiastic members of the public who will help us navigate on this journey. With all that assistance, I am hopeful that we will arrive at a place that is better than we could have imagined as we were careening down the road on the previous crypto road trip. Before I discuss the promise and opportunity the task force represents, let me offer some important disclaimers.
First, despite now being charged with leading the SEC’s new Crypto Task Force, the views that I express are my own as a Commissioner and not necessarily those of the SEC or my fellow Commissioners. Commission positions always require a vote of the Commission.
Second, it took us a long time to get into this mess, and it is going to take us some time to get out of it. The Commission has engaged with the crypto industry in one form or another for more than a decade. The first bitcoin exchange-traded product application hit our doorstep in 2013, and the Commission brought a fraud case that had a tangential crypto element that same year.[2] In 2017, we issued the DAO Section 21(a) report, which reflected the first application of the Howey test in this context.[3] Since then, there have been many enforcement actions, a number of no-action letters, some exemptive relief, endless talk about crypto in speeches and statements, lots of meetings with crypto entrepreneurs many inter-agency and international crypto working groups, discussion of certain aspects of crypto in rulemaking proposals, consideration of crypto-related issues in reviews of registration statements and other filings, and approval of numerous SRO proposed rule changes to list crypto exchange-traded products. Throughout this time, the Commission’s handling of crypto has been marked by legal imprecision and commercial impracticality. Consequently, many cases remain in litigation, many rules remain in the proposal stage, and many market participants remain in limbo. Determining how best to disentangle all these strands, including ongoing litigation, will take time. It will involve work across the whole agency and cooperation with other regulators. Please be patient. The Task Force wants to get to a good place, but we need to do so in an orderly, practical, and legally defensible way.
Third, the Task Force wants to travel to a destination where people have great freedom to experiment and build interesting things, and which will not be a haven for fraudsters. One of the reasons the U.S. capital markets are so robust, efficient, and effective is that we have rules designed to protect investors and the integrity of the marketplace, and we enforce those rules. We do not tolerate liars, cheaters, and scammers. As the Task Force works to help develop this regulatory framework, it will give careful consideration to antifraud protections. If the Commission spots fraud that lies outside our jurisdiction, it can refer the matter to a sister regulator. If it does not fall within any regulator’s jurisdiction, the Commission can bring that gap to Congress’s attention.
Fourth, the Task Force is working to help create a regulatory framework that both achieves the Commission’s important regulatory objectives—including protecting investors—and preserves industry’s ability to offer products and services. This framework will be within the statutory authority given to the Commission, and we will work with other regulators operating within their own statutory authorities. The statutes already on the books do not allow a free-for-all for products that fall within our jurisdiction. Congress has put parameters in place, and the Commission will apply them. Congress also has given us exemptive authority, and the Commission will use it, as appropriate. Where Congress has directed the Commission to impose requirements on market participants, SEC rules will not let you do whatever you want, whenever you want, however you want. Some of these rules will impose costs and other compliance burdens that some may find irritating, and the Commission will use its enforcement tools when necessary to pursue noncompliance.
Fifth, the Commission staff is working hard to process applications for exemptive relief, requests for no-action letters, and registration statements, but an uptick in the volume is likely to prove challenging. Adherence to technical and legal requirements, well-reasoned legal analysis, and thorough and timely responses to staff questions help to conserve Commission resources and makes for a quicker, smoother trip toward the destination of greater regulatory clarity. As always, such diligence will help an application move through the approval process more smoothly; conversely, the absence of it may cause unnecessary delays. Being first in the door may not mean being first out the door.
Sixth, the new commitment to a better regulatory environment should not be viewed as an endorsement of any crypto coin or token. Regardless of whether those tokens or coins fall within our jurisdiction, the Commission never endorses any product or service; there is no such thing as an SEC seal of approval. Spinning up coins and tokens is easy. If people want to buy a token or product that lacks a clear long-term value proposition, they should feel free to but should not be surprised if someday the price drops. In this country, people generally have a right to make decisions for themselves, but the counterpart to that wonderful American liberty is the equally wonderful American expectation that people must decide for themselves, not look to Mama Government to tell them what to do or not to do, nor to bail them out when they do something that turns out badly.
Now, with those rather gruff disclaimers out of the way, let’s talk a bit about what the Task Force is working on with staff across the Commission’s policy divisions. We will collaborate with others across the federal government, with state securities regulators, and with our international counterparts. We invite builders, enthusiasts, and skeptics to engage with us to figure out what the final rules should be and what interim steps might help to foster innovation in the meantime. The Commission staff already has achieved one milestone—the rescission of Staff Accounting Bulletin 121—but there is much more to do.[4] This list is not exhaustive, nor is it presented in order of priority or order of expected completion.
This brief overview of how the Task Force is looking at the journey ahead is not exhaustive or definitive, but I hope it has piqued your interest. Although the obstacles to getting to our final destination of a sensible, clear ruleset are daunting, if we collaborate, the journey will be exhilarating and rewarding. This is the beginning of the conversation—one we do not want to have just with ourselves. Please visit our Crypto Task Force webpage to follow what the Task Force is doing and to engage with the Task Force.
- Security Status: The status of crypto assets under the securities laws is fundamental to resolving many other questions. The Task Force is working hard to examine different types of crypto assets.
- Scoping Out: The Task Force will work to help identify some areas that fall outside the Commission’s jurisdiction. As an initial step, the staff welcomes requests for no-action letters. No-action letters typically come in the form of a staff statement addressing specific circumstances spelled out in the letter under which the staff will not recommend enforcement action to the Commission. This statement is specific to the particular circumstances but gives the broader public a helpful window into the staff’s thinking.
- Coin and Token Offerings: The Task Force also is thinking about the possibility of recommending Commission action to provide temporary prospective and retroactive relief for coin or token offerings for which the issuing entity or some other entity willing to take responsibility provides certain specified information, keeps that information updated, and agrees not to contest the Commission’s jurisdiction in the event of a case alleging fraud in connection with the purchase and sale of the asset. These tokens would be deemed to be non-securities and thus there would be no uncertainty as to whether they would be able to trade freely on secondary markets not registered with the SEC as long as the information is kept up-to-date and accurate. This approach would bridge the gap until a more permanent rule or legislation could be finalized. It would provide a pathway for existing tokens to find their way out of the fog of uncertainty that obscures a feasible path forward and would encourage the provision of greater disclosure.
- Registered Offerings: The Task Force will consider working with staff to recommend that the Commission modify existing paths to registration, including Regulation A and crowdfunding, so that people interested in registering token offerings will have a viable path for doing so.
- Special Purpose Broker Dealer: The Task Force will explore possible updates to the special-purpose broker dealer no-action statement, which in its current form has not been a success. An initial change we may suggest is that the statement be expanded to cover broker-dealers that custody crypto asset securities alongside crypto assets that are not securities. We will work with the public to identify other obstacles to registration.
- Custody Solutions for Investment Advisers: We will work with investment advisers to provide an appropriate regulatory framework within which advisers can safely, legally, and practically custody client assets themselves or with a third-party.
- Crypto-Lending and Staking: We need to provide clarity about whether crypto-lending and staking programs are covered by the securities laws and, if so, how. We plan to work to help address how such programs can be structured consistent with the law.
- Crypto Exchange-Traded Products: The Commission already is receiving SRO proposed rule changes to list new types of crypto exchange-traded products. The Task Force will work with the staff to provide clear statements about the approach used when approving or disapproving these applications. The Task Force will also assist the staff and the Commission in considering requests to modify certain features of existing exchange-traded products, including to allow for staking and in-kind creations and redemptions. Before these changes can be operationalized, however, the Commission may have to make progress on custody and other issues.
- Clearing Agencies and Transfer Agents: The Task Force also plans to work on the intersection of crypto and clearing agency and transfer agent rules. We will continue to work with market participants interested in tokenizing securities or otherwise using blockchain technology to modernize traditional financial markets.
- Cross-Border Sandbox: Many crypto projects are international in scope. The Task Force is considering ways to facilitate cross-border experimentation on a limited scale and temporary timeframe, with the possibility of more permanent, long-term approaches.
I have to wonder if BTC weakness might be related to Tether (USDT) issues presently (being delisted from major exchanges).
JPMorgan (JPM) published a report on Wednesday warning stablecoin giant Tether, that it could be forced to liquidate some of its bitcoin (BTC) holdings in order to comply with upcoming legislation, but Tether CEO Paolo Ardoino scoffed at the bank’s comments on Thursday.
Tether, which dominates roughly 62% of the $230 billion stablecoin market with its flagship token USDT, recently posted a massive $13 billion profit for its 2024 fiscal year and currently owns around 84,000 BTC in one of its main addresses.
But reporting from The Block shows that JPM conducted an analysis of Tether to determine if it was prepared for the possible enactment of stablecoin bills in the House and Senate titled ‘‘Stablecoin Transparency and Accountability for a Better Ledger Economy (STABLE) Act” and the ‘‘Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for U.S. Stablecoins (GENIUS) Act,” respectively.
JPM analysts estimate that under the House’s STABLE Act, 66% of the stablecoin issuer’s $144 billion in reserve assets would be complaint, while 83% would be compliant under the Senate’s GENIUS Act. The analysts reckon Tether would be forced to replace some of its BTC with traditional assets such as U.S. Treasury bills, but Ardoino isn’t buying it.
...
Per The Block, Ardoino pointed out that JPM did not factor in Tether’s $20 billion in group equity that generates over $1.2 billion in quarterly profits. Regarding compliance with the STABLE and GENIUS Acts, he reportedly said it “will be straightforward.”
The Securities and Exchanges Commission (SEC) has set itself a deadline for a decision on whether it will allow an exchange-traded fund (ETF) tracking the price of XRP (XRP).
The SEC acknowledged a 19b-4 filing by the New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) and asset manager Grayscale, which is the first time it has responded to a filing regarding the crypto asset. This means that the Commission now has up to 240 days to make a decision on the filing.
While the regulator has previously acknowledged several other applications for crypto-focused ETFs, including for Solana (SOL), Litecoin (LTC) and Dogecoin (DOGE), this latest acknowledgement is is significant given that the SEC’s ongoing lawsuit against Ripple, the issuer of XRP.
...
“They could have easily rejected this filing,” said Nate Geraci, President of the ETF Store in a post on X. “Enormous message [in my opinion.]”
Last week, Bloomberg ETF analysts James Seyffart and Eric Balchunas predicted a 65% chance for an XRP ETF to be approved by the end of 2025. The two analysts gave the highest chances to a LTC ETF (90%), followed by DOGE (75%) and SOL (65%).
All of the current outstanding ETF applications for those assets will receive a decision in October.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?