hodler

11 May 2026, 15:20

ABA Warns Clarity Act Could Fuel Bank Deposit Outflows to Stablecoins

BitcoinWorld ABA Warns Clarity Act Could Fuel Bank Deposit Outflows to Stablecoins The American Bankers Association (ABA) has raised a stark warning about the potential unintended consequences of the Clarity Act, a proposed U.S. legislative framework for payment stablecoins. In a recent open letter addressed to major bank CEOs, ABA President and CEO Rob Nichols argued that the bill, in its current form, could actively encourage a significant outflow of bank deposits into stablecoins, threatening both economic growth and financial stability. What the ABA Letter Says Nichols’s letter, which has circulated among top banking executives, outlines specific concerns that the Clarity Act does not adequately prevent crypto firms from offering interest-like rewards on stablecoin holdings. This, he warns, creates a regulatory asymmetry where stablecoins could function as de facto interest-bearing accounts without the same consumer protections, capital requirements, and oversight that traditional banks face. The ABA contends that such a dynamic would incentivize depositors to shift funds out of insured bank accounts into uninsured or lightly regulated stablecoin products. The Clarity Act, introduced in Congress earlier this year, aims to establish a federal regulatory framework for payment stablecoins — digital tokens designed to maintain a stable value, typically pegged to the U.S. dollar. Proponents argue the bill provides legal clarity for issuers and fosters innovation. However, the ABA’s intervention signals deepening concern from the traditional banking sector that the legislation, as drafted, could undermine the deposit base that underpins bank lending and the broader financial system. Broader Implications for the Banking Sector The ABA’s warning comes at a time when the stablecoin market has already grown to over $200 billion in circulating supply, with major issuers like Tether (USDT) and Circle (USDC) dominating the space. If the Clarity Act passes without amendments, the ABA fears a scenario where large technology or payments companies — not traditional banks — become the primary custodians of consumer savings, potentially concentrating systemic risk outside the regulated banking framework. Nichols specifically called for stronger regulations to prevent stablecoin issuers from offering yield-like incentives that mimic bank deposit accounts. The ABA is advocating for amendments that would impose stricter limits on such practices, ensuring a level playing field between banks and stablecoin issuers. The letter emphasizes that without these changes, the bill could inadvertently accelerate the very financial disintermediation it seeks to regulate. Why This Matters Now The debate over stablecoin regulation is not new, but the ABA’s direct appeal to bank CEOs — rather than solely to lawmakers — suggests a coordinated effort to mobilize the banking industry’s lobbying power. With the Clarity Act expected to face further committee hearings in the coming months, the ABA’s position could influence amendments that either tighten or loosen the regulatory leash on stablecoins. For consumers, the outcome of this legislative battle will determine whether stablecoins remain a niche digital asset or evolve into a mainstream payments tool that competes directly with traditional bank deposits. The ABA’s warning highlights a fundamental tension: how to foster innovation in digital payments without destabilizing the deposit-based banking model that has underpinned U.S. economic growth for decades. Conclusion The ABA’s open letter represents a significant pushback from the traditional banking sector against the Clarity Act’s current provisions. As the legislative process unfolds, the key question remains whether Congress will amend the bill to address the ABA’s concerns — or whether stablecoins will gain a regulatory green light that could reshape the landscape of U.S. retail banking. The outcome will have lasting implications for financial stability, consumer protection, and the future of money in America. FAQs Q1: What is the Clarity Act? The Clarity Act is a proposed U.S. federal law that aims to create a regulatory framework for payment stablecoins — digital tokens pegged to a stable asset like the U.S. dollar. It seeks to define issuer requirements, reserve standards, and consumer protections. Q2: Why is the ABA concerned about stablecoins? The ABA fears that stablecoins offering interest-like rewards could attract deposits away from traditional banks, reducing the deposit base that banks rely on for lending. This could threaten financial stability and economic growth. Q3: What changes does the ABA want to the Clarity Act? The ABA is calling for stronger regulations to prevent stablecoin issuers from offering yield-like incentives that mimic bank deposit accounts. It wants a level regulatory playing field between banks and crypto firms. This post ABA Warns Clarity Act Could Fuel Bank Deposit Outflows to Stablecoins first appeared on BitcoinWorld .

11 May 2026, 15:05

Crypto Funds Pull In $857.9M Last Week as CLARITY Act Markup Lifts

Digital asset investment funds recorded $857.9 million in weekly inflows last week, with bitcoin accounting for $706.1 million of those gains, as growing optimism over the U.S. Senate’s scheduled CLARITY Act markup on May 14 revived institutional appetite for crypto exposure. CLARITY Act Momentum Flips the Script Coinshares, the digital asset investment firm that tracks

11 May 2026, 15:05

Biggest Bitcoin Critic Schiff Demands SEC Antifraud Investigation Into Saylor and Strategy

Michael Saylor and Strategy are facing calls for an SEC antifraud investigation as Peter Schiff warns that the company's STRC model exposes retirees to what he calls a Bitcoin-linked Ponzi scheme.

11 May 2026, 15:04

IBIT: 35% Crypto Crash Ahead On Clarity Act Setback

Summary Bitcoin and correlated assets like IBIT are rallying on misplaced optimism over the CLARITY Act. Deep stakeholder deadlock—ABA, Treasury, crypto community—makes passage of the CLARITY Act highly improbable, risking an imminent 35%+ crypto drawdown. Even if stakeholders reach a compromise, there may simply not be enough legislative runway left for the bill to clear all procedural hurdles and become law. The Trump administration’s crypto-friendly posture is unlikely to stop institutions from carefully weighing the regulatory, operational, and reputational risks associated with deeper crypto adoption. Short-term traders may consider SBIT to benefit from this drawdown, while completely eliminating exposure to IBIT and similar ETFs. Bitcoin’s ( BTC-USD ) recovery to its current trading value of approximately $81,000, since the February crash that I forecasted weeks before , seems to be purely speculative. To be more precise, BTC and instruments with 1:1 correlation to it, such as the iShares Bitcoin Trust ETF ( IBIT ), have rallied due to irrational optimism around the CLARITY Act. Even now, the odds of the bill passing on Polymarket are between 60 and 70 percent , when it should be close to zero based on my judgement. I claim so despite recent and purportedly positive developments on the stablecoin yields conflict. Therefore, in my opinion, as and when retail investors do realize that the bill is effectively dead, a correction of 35% across all major cryptos may follow. Haze Beats CLARITY One of the primary reasons for my assertion is the stalemate among the key stakeholders - the American Bankers Association (ABA), the United States Department of the Treasury, and the crypto community - with stablecoin yields as the primary point of contention. To elaborate, the ABA believes that if crypto exchanges offer stablecoin yields/rewards, they will outcompete traditional banks, leading to a $6.6 trillion deposits flight. To be specific, the ABA sent a letter to the Senate: The letter warns that without stronger legislative clarity, up to $6.6 trillion in deposits could be at risk, threatening the availability of credit for households and businesses nationwide. A detailed state-by-state analysis of potential deposit outflows and lost lending accompanies the letter. Estimates from the Federal Reserve support that claim by stating that there could be a $1.26 trillion reduction in local lending if stablecoin yields are not abolished. (Please read under section titled 3.1 Balance Sheet Capacity and Asset Allocation Adjustments) The crypto community, on the other hand, believes that if they don’t offer such high yields, a major incentive to invest in stablecoins would be eliminated, stifling both adoption and innovation. That was why Brian Armstrong withdrew support for the bill in January 2026. An overlooked player in this game, the U.S. Treasury, would also be on the losing side if stablecoin adoption decelerates. That is because stablecoins have become a major buyer of U.S. Government Bonds in the past few years. Tether ( USDT-USD ), for instance, in and of itself, holds more than $135 billion in Treasuries. To put things into context, that is more than what Germany or South Korea holds. In addition to the obvious impact that limited stablecoin adoption will have on treasury purchases, effectively eliminating a huge source of funds for the government, there are also concerns that capital may instead flow to rivals such as China, the EU, or the UK that do (or would) pay interest on their respective digital sovereign currencies. Such a stalemate, that too among heavyweight stakeholders, puts the Senate in a difficult situation to say the least. Stated another way, they cannot move forward without severely compromising the interests of at least one stakeholder. On the other hand, maintaining the status quo, which has already led to a crypto market cap of ~$2.5 trillion , keeps everyone as content as they were before the CLARITY Act. I, therefore, believe that Congress may choose to just let the bill die and continue with “haze” instead of “clarity.” The 6.6 Trillion Dollar Question My conclusion in the previous section would fall flat if the ABA’s $6.6 trillion number is inaccurate. Stated differently, if that number is imprecise, the Senate would disregard it and move to pass the bill without eliminating stablecoin yields. In my opinion, judging whether that number is correct is really a matter of common sense rather than financial modelling. Especially because different financial models and assumptions used therein will lead to materially different numbers. A report published by the Council of Economic Advisers (CEA) at the White House serves as a great example. Precisely speaking, the CEA concluded that banning yield payments would only increase total bank lending by $2.1 billion. The ABA responded to the study by stating that it focuses on the wrong topic: lending as opposed to deposits. Moreover, CEA assumes a stablecoin market size as it stands today at roughly $300 billion, as opposed to what it would be in the future with increased adoption. It is, therefore, better to arrive at our own conclusions, which is simpler than it sounds. If a fully and financially regulated entity were to offer you roughly 4 percent on deposits, along with the usability of a regular bank account, such as the ability to pay bills, use a debit card, etc., would you continue to hold money at your bank? It would be fair to say that a large percentage of the population would answer that question with an unequivocal and resounding ‘no.’ With that in mind, I believe that the ABA’s and the Fed’s concerns about capital flight are warranted, and my conclusion that Congress cannot pass the bill without severely compromising the interests of one of the stakeholders remains valid. Lost In The Crowd Now, for a discussion on the most recent and crucial development: connecting rewards/yields with activity. In essence, the crypto industry recently agreed to compromise on the issue of rewards/yields if determined by usage. Definitely a non-trivial development because it brought back Brian Armstrong ’s support for the bill. But there is a problem. The bill, according to the aforementioned Yahoo! Finance link, states that “cryptocurrency firms would be banned from offering rewards that are economically or functionally equivalent to deposit interest.” What is the definition of "activity"? And what qualifies as "economically or functionally equivalent"? There are many ways to circumvent that restriction. For instance, Coinbase can offer rewards for only one payment per month, or for moving funds to and from its other offerings, such as Coinbase Asset Management . American banks are acutely aware of this flaw, which is why they recently said that this compromise “falls short” . I believe that this is going to the primary point of contention during the executive session of the Senate Banking Committee on May 14 . Please note that this is not a Senate voting session, only a markup session. The bill still has to go through the Senate to become a law. And I think those who assume that will happen are being too optimistic because the Senate has not touched the bill since September 18, 2025 . Odds that the Senate will consider the bill diminish further when you realize that they are in session for only ten working days in May 2026. Moreover, in those ten days, they need to commence preparations for budget appropriations and defense authorizations. In fact, if you look at the meetings that the Senate has decided on for May, you can observe that their focus has already shifted towards those two topics. And as many would know, once May is over, focus will completely shift to budget approvals. Given that the Congress has passed budgets before the October 1 deadline only three times since 1980 (please read under the section titled How is a CR different from a budget? ) it is reasonable to say that they won’t really have time for a non-essential bill like the CLARITY Act. Even if the Senate were to discuss the bill and mark it up, it would then have to survive the 60-vote Senate floor filibuster threshold. Surviving the filibuster would be a very difficult feat because democrats are not really pro-crypto, as demonstrated by their actions during the Biden Era, such as Operation Chokepoint 2.0 . Then the bill has to reconcile with the Senate Agriculture Committee’s version, reconcile again with the House-passed CLARITY Act, and finally receive a presidential signature. With all that in mind, I do not think it is speculative to say that the bill is already dead just because there is not enough time. Trump Cannot Save The Day A major risk to my thesis stems from the fact that President Trump is crypto-friendly . To be more specific, my thesis could be wrong not because the CLARITY Act may still have a chance, but because Trump’s actions can cause future crypto rallies. His favorable attitude towards crypto has indeed led to supportive second-order effects, such as the appointment of Paul Atkins as the SEC chairman, who then launched the pro-crypto initiative called Project Crypto . Even the current commerce secretary, Howard Lutnick, favors crypto innovation . While such a pro-crypto administration is beneficial for innovation and advancement in the field, it cannot establish new laws. That is to say, even if the SEC provides friendly directives, it cannot change the fact that any new law cannot come into existence unless Congress deems it so. This is why the SEC could issue only an interpretation on how the federal securities laws apply to certain crypto assets and transactions involving crypto assets. By definition, an interpretation does not mean a law and thus can be challenged in court. More importantly, it can be modified and completely revoked if the next administration is not crypto-friendly. You may refute the possibility of detrimental effects of an unfriendly future regime as irrelevant because regulations, and thus innovations, would have advanced significantly by the time Trump’s term is over, especially because the SEC is not really waiting for Congress to take action. I, however, believe that all these developments are inconsequential because the lack of complete regulatory clarity is an impediment to adoption among institutional investors. That is because institutions care about legal certainty and compliance risk as much as they care about potential returns. In other words, the lack of clarity creates more “unknown unknowns,” leading to a decelerated institutional adoption scenario. IBIT can be used as an example to indicate why institutions may shy away from crypto adoption if clear and specific laws are not put in place. If you were to go through IBIT’s SEC filings (page 2), you would notice that Coinbase is IBIT’s primary Bitcoin custodian. The SEC dismissed its case against Coinbase in 2025 , right after Trump came into office, but that does not mean that Coinbase will not be subject to scrutiny ever again. As a matter of fact, the risk of crypto exchanges coming under the SEC’s jurisdiction will only increase in the coming years because of the tokenization of stocks and the possibility that these tokenized assets may fail the Howey Test . That kind of uncertainty, and many others that may crop up without a legal framework, may compel institutional investors to shy away from crypto investments. That in turn will cause a pricing out of optimism around institutional adoption and a crash from current levels. Portfolio Positioning As the title of this article suggests, I expect at least a 35 percent drop in the coming days. Specifically, I expect the BTC to break its previous support level of $60,000, but find support at $49,000. For IBIT, the corresponding lowest value possible could be $28. BTC's Next Support Level At $49,000 (TradingView) I expect Ethereum ( ETH-USD ) and Ripple ( XRP-USD ) to crash harder because they are more connected to innovations around payment rails, stablecoins, and DeFi – topics that form the core of the CLARITY Act. Numerically speaking, ETH will probably drop to $1350, and XRP may fall back to its pre-Trump-era value of 50 cents per coin. If you want to take advantage of these drawdowns, it would be prudent to invest in a reverse crypto play. Previously, I had recommended the YieldMax MSTR Short Option Income Strategy ETF ( WNTR ). But it has performed horribly over the long run due to the fact that WNTR is a reverse-ETF on Strategy ( MSTR ), which is now trading at a level higher than the January crash. A highly illogical occurrence because BTC is the primary determinant of MSTR’s value, and is trading at prices lower than the January crash. That said, WNTR did experience substantial short-term gains in January-February. An even better performer, though, was the ProShares UltraShort Bitcoin ETF ( SBIT ), which almost doubled in value after the last crash. Unfortunately, that ETF has also lost most of its value since. With all that data under consideration, I recommended that readers buy SBIT as a short-term trading instrument only and completely ignore WNTR. Closing Thoughts I have been racking my brain to figure out the best time to enter this trade, but I am still not completely certain. The most likely date, at present, seems to be May 14 because on that date we may learn that the ABA is unwilling to accept the bill in its current form for reasons I have already explained. In other words, the ABA, as a lobbying group, will most likely pressure the committee to oppose advancing the bill unless revisions are made. And as concluded earlier, since there is already not enough time for the bill to pass through all stages of Congress, it could effectively be considered dead. But it is also possible that the crash may commence when the Senate’s complete schedule is revealed for May and if the CLARITY Act is not mentioned anywhere; or the plunge may commence when all sessions end on May 22; or it could be that the crash happens at any other time if another negative catalyst, such as military escalation with Iran, comes into play. Due to this ambiguity around timing, I recommend inexperienced traders to sit this one out. As for those interested in investing in BTC, ETH, or any other crypto-related instrument for the long-haul, I remain committed to my price target of BTC at $30,000 , and ETH at $996 by the end of this crypto winter. I also have a pretty good idea of what will cause BTC and ETH to drop to those levels after this CLARITY Act crash, and I will write about it in a future article.

11 May 2026, 15:02

XRP Named Alongside Bitcoin and Ethereum. Here’s the Latest

The crypto industry is entering a new phase. Regulation is reshaping the landscape, and the networks positioned to lead in the long term are becoming clearer. XRP is at the center of that conversation. Skipper (@skipper_xrp), a prominent voice in the XRP community, posted a video laying out his conviction on where crypto is heading. He believes the post-regulation era will produce a dominant group of networks that includes XRP. Skipper Names XRP Alongside Bitcoin and Ethereum Skipper has held this position since 2020. In the video, he stated, “The big three, just like the auto boom, just like the dot com boom, there’s going to be the big three after the crypto boom, XRP, Bitcoin, and Ethereum.” He went further, saying the rest of the market will be focused on surviving regulation . The big three, in his view, will not face that same struggle but will lead the market. Analysts believe the post-regulation crypto era will be led by Bitcoin, Ethereum, and XRP — the networks most likely to survive and dominate long term. At the same time, the #XRP -Ledger is evolving into next-generation Web3 infrastructure. Anonix is bringing AI-powered tools,… https://t.co/xRFmKCoFfB pic.twitter.com/WEHmpMEbxD — Skipper | XRPL (@skipper_xrp) May 8, 2026 Regulation Becomes a Catalyst, Not a Threat His video suggests that XRP could rise above $10,000 this year. While many have criticized similar predictions, he identified Bitcoin, Ethereum, and XRP as the networks most likely to emerge from the regulatory period in a position of strength. Where regulation creates uncertainty, these three networks are positioned to benefit. According to Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse, XRP is at the center of this regulatory shift . Regulatory clarity has been a long-running focus for the asset. The post points to XRP as a network where security and utility converge, making it a strong candidate for real-world Web3 adoption at scale. The XRP Ledger Expands Its Capabilities While the macro argument for XRP strengthens, the XRP Ledger itself is evolving. The post highlights a project building directly on XRPL. It gives AI-powered tools, decentralized social features, and quantum-resistant privacy to the network. Quantum-resistant privacy addresses a genuine future risk in digital infrastructure. A recent Google research paper confirmed that XRP is ahead of Bitcoin in Quantum-resistant design. We are on X, follow us to connect with us :- @TimesTabloid1 — TimesTabloid (@TimesTabloid1) June 15, 2025 AI integration increases utility, and decentralized social features expand the user base and use cases available on XRPL. The post describes XRPL as a next-generation Web3 infrastructure. The development activity on the network supports that characterization. What This Means for XRP’s Price Outlook Skipper’s long-held conviction, paired with growing analyst consensus, adds weight to the case for XRP. XRP already has regulatory clarity, and progress with legislation like the CLARITY Act will reinforce its status. Regulatory clarity reduces risk, and infrastructure development increases utility. Both factors support price growth over time, and XRP is well-positioned to capitalize. Disclaimer : This content is meant to inform and should not be considered financial advice. The views expressed in this article may include the author’s personal opinions and do not represent Times Tabloid’s opinion. Readers are advised to conduct thorough research before making any investment decisions. Any action taken by the reader is strictly at their own risk. Times Tabloid is not responsible for any financial losses. Follow us on X , Facebook , Telegram , and Google News The post XRP Named Alongside Bitcoin and Ethereum. Here’s the Latest appeared first on Times Tabloid .

11 May 2026, 15:00

Galaxy and Sharplink Launch $125M DeFi Yield Fund Targeting Institutional-Grade Returns

BitcoinWorld Galaxy and Sharplink Launch $125M DeFi Yield Fund Targeting Institutional-Grade Returns Galaxy Digital, the cryptocurrency financial services firm founded by Mike Novogratz, has partnered with Ethereum treasury management company Sharplink to launch a $125 million decentralized finance (DeFi) yield fund. The initiative, named the Galaxy Sharplink Onchain Yield Fund, aims to generate returns through active DeFi strategies while maintaining institutional-grade security standards. Fund Structure and Capital Allocation According to the announcement, the fund will be seeded with $100 million from Sharplink’s existing Ethereum treasury, which currently stands at approximately $2.1 billion. Galaxy will contribute an additional $25 million and serve as the sole fund manager. This structure places Galaxy in charge of day-to-day investment decisions, while Sharplink provides the bulk of the capital. Sharplink CEO Joseph Chalom stated that the partnership reflects a strategic shift for the firm. “Our goal is to make our ETH productive beyond simply holding it,” Chalom said, emphasizing that the fund will deploy capital into DeFi protocols that meet rigorous institutional security criteria. Expanding Beyond Passive Staking Sharplink has historically focused on staking its ETH holdings, a relatively low-risk strategy that generates yield by participating in network validation. The new fund represents a move into more active DeFi yield generation methods, including lending and liquidity provision. These strategies involve supplying assets to decentralized lending markets or automated market-making pools, which can offer higher returns but also carry increased risks such as smart contract vulnerabilities and impermanent loss. By partnering with Galaxy, Sharplink gains access to Galaxy’s established infrastructure for institutional DeFi investing, including risk assessment frameworks and protocol due diligence processes. Galaxy, which manages over $6 billion in assets across its various divisions, has been expanding its presence in the DeFi space through products like its Galaxy DeFi Fund launched in 2021. Market Context and Implications The launch comes at a time when institutional interest in DeFi is growing, but remains cautious following several high-profile hacks and exploits in the sector. Total value locked across DeFi protocols has fluctuated between $40 billion and $80 billion over the past year, according to DeFiLlama data, reflecting both opportunity and volatility. For Sharplink, the fund provides a way to put its substantial ETH holdings to work beyond simple appreciation. For Galaxy, it strengthens its position as a bridge between traditional finance and on-chain yield opportunities. The fund’s focus on institutional-grade security standards may also signal a maturation of DeFi as an asset class, potentially attracting more conservative investors. Conclusion The Galaxy Sharplink Onchain Yield Fund represents a notable collaboration between a major crypto financial services firm and a large Ethereum treasury manager. By combining Sharplink’s capital with Galaxy’s management expertise, the fund aims to generate returns through active DeFi strategies while adhering to institutional security protocols. The success of this initiative could influence how other large ETH holders approach yield generation in the decentralized finance ecosystem. FAQs Q1: What is the Galaxy Sharplink Onchain Yield Fund? A: It is a $125 million decentralized finance (DeFi) yield fund launched by Galaxy Digital and Sharplink. The fund will invest in active DeFi strategies such as lending and liquidity provision, with Galaxy serving as the sole manager. Q2: How is the fund capitalized? A: Sharplink is contributing $100 million from its Ethereum treasury, and Galaxy is contributing $25 million. The total fund size is $125 million. Q3: Why is this fund significant? A: It represents a shift for Sharplink from passive staking to more active DeFi yield strategies, and it highlights growing institutional interest in DeFi. The fund’s emphasis on institutional-grade security standards may also help legitimize DeFi as an asset class for traditional investors. This post Galaxy and Sharplink Launch $125M DeFi Yield Fund Targeting Institutional-Grade Returns first appeared on BitcoinWorld .