hodler

13 Feb 2026, 20:29

Clarity Act Passage Would 'Comfort' Markets Amid Bitcoin Volatility: Treasury Secretary Bessent

U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent suggested that the crypto market would be calmed by the passage of the Clarity Act.

13 Feb 2026, 20:27

Netherlands Approves 36% Crypto Tax: BTC Analysis

Dutch House of Representatives approved 36% capital gains tax. Unrealized gains will be taxed starting from 2028. A 1.4 million Euro loss is projected over 40 years. BTC 68,750 USD, institutions bu...

13 Feb 2026, 19:51

Coinbase CEO: Stablecoins will become the default currency for AI agents

More on Coinbase Coinbase: Take Advantage Of Extreme Fear To 'Buy' Coinbase Is Approaching A Margin Trough, Buy Whale's Digital Asset View: Deep Dive Of Pendle Coinbase stock buoyed by stock buybacks, revenue diversification, legislation outlook Coinbase signals Everything Exchange expansion and $2B buyback amid diversified revenue growth

13 Feb 2026, 19:06

Binance Under Fire After Letting Go of Investigators Behind Iran Sanctions Findings

Crypto exchange Binance is facing renewed scrutiny after reports that several compliance investigators were dismissed following internal findings tied to Iran-related transactions. The developments come amid broader changes within the exchange’s compliance structure and public comments from former CEO Changpeng Zhao. According to a report by Fortune, investigators on Binance’s compliance team identified more than $1 billion in transactions linked to entities tied to Iran between March 2024 and August 2025. The transactions reportedly involved the stablecoin Tether on the Tron blockchain. After internal reports were submitted, at least five investigators were dismissed starting in late 2025. Internal Findings and Reported Firings The dismissed staff included individuals with law enforcement backgrounds in Europe and Asia. Several held leadership roles related to financial crime investigations and sanctions compliance. The exact reason for their termination has not been publicly confirmed. Fortune cited anonymous sources who said at least four additional senior compliance officials have left or were pushed out in recent months. Binance declined to comment on individual personnel matters. A company spokesperson said, “As a matter of policy, we cannot comment on ongoing investigations. Binance is committed to complying with all applicable sanctions laws.” The company added that employees who breach company policy are subject to dismissal and that its compliance teams remain active. The reported dismissals occurred while Binance remains under a government-imposed monitorship following its 2023 settlement with U.S. authorities. Former Binance CEO CZ Responds to Allegations Changpeng Zhao, known as CZ, responded publicly to the report. He stated that he does not know the details but questioned the narrative presented. “I don’t run Binance anymore, but as an ex-CEO, I know they run EVERY transaction through multiple third party AML tools,” Zhao wrote on social media. He also noted that the same AML tools are used by law enforcement agencies. Zhao argued that anonymous sources can shape negative narratives without clear evidence. He suggested that if violations occurred, external monitoring systems would likely have detected them. As of today, Zhao remains the majority stakeholder of BNB. He controls about 94 million BNB tokens, representing roughly 64% of the circulating supply. In 2023, Binance pleaded guilty to anti-money laundering and sanctions violations and agreed to pay $4.3 billion in penalties. Zhao also pleaded guilty to failing to implement adequate oversight and later served a four-month sentence. He stepped down as CEO, and Binance appointed Richard Teng as his successor. Compliance Restructuring and Regulatory Oversight Following the 2023 settlement, Binance pledged to improve compliance controls and expand its internal oversight. In November 2024, the exchange announced plans to increase its compliance staff by 34% to 645 employees. Job listings indicate that the company continues to hire for compliance roles. The reported firings also come as Binance seeks a successor for Chief Compliance Officer Noah Perlman, a former U.S. prosecutor. A source familiar with the matter said Perlman plans to transition out later this year, and his departure is not tied to the investigator dismissals. The timing of the events coincides with political developments in the United States. As the Coinpaper reported, President Donald Trump granted Zhao a pardon in October 2025 related to his earlier conviction. Binance has also engaged lobbyists in Washington and supported crypto initiatives linked to World Liberty Financial. Security Incident in France Separate from the compliance issue, Binance France head David Princay was targeted in an attempted home invasion on February 12. According to local police, three masked men entered a residential building in Val-de-Marne searching for the executive. They failed to locate him and left with two mobile phones. Authorities reported that the same group later attempted a second break-in in Vaucresson but targeted the wrong address. Police tracked the suspects using surveillance footage and arrested them at Lyon Perrache station. Yi He, co-founder of Binance, confirmed that the employee and his family are safe and that the company is cooperating with law enforcement.

13 Feb 2026, 19:00

US China De-Risk Strategy: Treasury Secretary Bessent’s Crucial Shift from Economic Decoupling

BitcoinWorld US China De-Risk Strategy: Treasury Secretary Bessent’s Crucial Shift from Economic Decoupling WASHINGTON, D.C., March 2025 – US Treasury Secretary Bessent delivered a pivotal policy statement this week, explicitly rejecting calls for economic decoupling from China while advocating for a strategic de-risking approach. This nuanced position represents a significant evolution in US-China economic relations, potentially reshaping global trade patterns and investment flows for years to come. The announcement comes amid ongoing tensions and follows extensive diplomatic consultations across multiple administrations. Defining De-Risk: A Strategic Alternative to Decoupling Secretary Bessent’s statement marks a deliberate distinction between two fundamentally different economic approaches. Decoupling implies a comprehensive separation of economic systems, potentially severing trade, investment, and technological exchanges. Conversely, de-risking focuses on identifying and mitigating specific vulnerabilities within the economic relationship while preserving mutually beneficial exchanges. This approach acknowledges the deep integration of the world’s two largest economies while addressing legitimate national security concerns. Global financial markets responded cautiously to the announcement. Major indices showed modest gains as investors interpreted the comments as reducing immediate trade disruption risks. However, analysts emphasized that implementation details would determine the long-term market impact. The policy shift follows years of escalating tariffs, export controls, and investment restrictions that began during previous administrations and continued through various phases of negotiation. The Economic Context Behind the Policy Shift Several converging factors influenced this refined policy direction. First, supply chain disruptions during recent global events demonstrated the costs of excessive concentration. Second, sustained inflation pressures necessitated reevaluating trade policies affecting consumer prices. Third, allied nations in Europe and Asia expressed concerns about overly restrictive measures that could fragment the global economy. Finally, Chinese economic reforms in certain sectors created opportunities for more targeted engagement. Recent trade data illustrates the relationship’s complexity. Despite tensions, bilateral trade reached approximately $650 billion in 2024. Chinese manufacturing still supplies critical components for American consumer electronics, automotive products, and industrial equipment. Simultaneously, American agricultural exports and semiconductor manufacturing equipment remain crucial to Chinese industries. This interdependence makes complete separation economically disruptive and politically challenging. Expert Analysis: The Practical Implementation Economic policy experts highlight several probable implementation areas for the de-risking strategy. The approach will likely focus on sectors with direct national security implications, including: Critical minerals and rare earth elements: Diversifying supply sources away from Chinese dominance Semiconductor manufacturing: Continuing export controls on advanced chips while maintaining trade in mature technologies Pharmaceutical ingredients: Building redundant supply chains for essential medicines Clean energy technology: Competing in solar, battery, and EV sectors while maintaining some research collaboration This sector-specific approach contrasts with broader decoupling proposals that would affect consumer goods, agricultural products, and general manufacturing. The Treasury Department will reportedly work with Commerce, Defense, and State departments to develop precise criteria for identifying “risk” versus “routine” economic activities. Global Reactions and Diplomatic Implications International responses to Secretary Bessent’s statement varied significantly. European Union officials welcomed the more nuanced approach, aligning with their own “de-risking, not decoupling” framework announced in 2023. Asian trading partners, particularly South Korea and Japan, expressed relief at reduced pressure to choose definitively between economic partners. Chinese state media offered cautious acknowledgment while emphasizing mutual interests in stable economic relations. The diplomatic timing proves noteworthy. This policy clarification precedes several high-level international meetings, including G20 finance minister gatherings and APEC discussions. It provides American diplomats with a clearer framework for coordinating with allies on China-related economic policies. However, significant challenges remain in aligning diverse national interests and security concerns across different allied nations. Historical Perspective: From Engagement to Strategic Competition The current policy represents the latest evolution in a decades-long relationship. The table below illustrates key phases in US-China economic relations: Period Policy Framework Key Characteristics 1979-2000 Constructive Engagement Trade normalization, MFN status, WTO accession support 2001-2016 Economic Integration WTO membership, manufacturing outsourcing, financial sector opening 2017-2022 Strategic Competition Tariff wars, technology restrictions, investment screening 2023-Present Managed Competition De-risking framework, selective engagement, alliance coordination This historical context demonstrates how economic realities consistently tempered geopolitical tensions. Even during periods of significant disagreement, both nations maintained substantial economic exchanges. The current de-risking approach continues this pattern of pragmatic adaptation to changing circumstances. Market Impacts and Business Considerations Corporate leaders have begun adjusting strategies in response to the clarified policy direction. Multinational corporations now face a more predictable, though still complex, operating environment. The clearer distinction between prohibited and permitted activities reduces some uncertainty that hampered investment decisions. However, compliance costs will likely increase as companies implement more sophisticated supply chain mapping and risk assessment protocols. Specific sectors will experience divergent impacts. Technology companies may continue facing restrictions in advanced areas but gain clarity on permissible collaborations. Agricultural exporters anticipate more stable trading conditions for commodities like soybeans and pork. Manufacturers must navigate evolving rules about sourcing and production location decisions. Financial institutions require updated frameworks for cross-border transactions and investment screening. Conclusion Treasury Secretary Bessent’s de-risking framework represents a pragmatic evolution in US-China economic policy. This approach acknowledges the substantial costs of complete decoupling while addressing legitimate concerns about over-dependence and national security vulnerabilities. The success of this strategy will depend on precise implementation, international coordination, and continuous assessment of evolving risks. As global economic dynamics continue shifting, this calibrated approach offers a potential pathway for managing great power competition while minimizing unnecessary economic disruption. The US China de-risk strategy will undoubtedly shape global economic architecture throughout 2025 and beyond. FAQs Q1: What exactly does “de-risking” mean in US-China relations? The term refers to targeted measures reducing specific vulnerabilities in the economic relationship, particularly in sectors with national security implications, while preserving mutually beneficial trade and investment in other areas. Q2: How does de-risking differ from decoupling? Decoupling implies comprehensive economic separation across all sectors. De-risking employs surgical measures addressing particular concerns without severing the overall economic relationship. Q3: Which sectors will face the most significant restrictions under this policy? Advanced semiconductors, artificial intelligence with military applications, critical minerals, and certain biotechnology sectors will likely see continued restrictions due to national security considerations. Q4: How will this policy affect ordinary consumers? Consumers may experience more stable prices for imported goods compared to full decoupling scenarios. However, some technology products might become more expensive due to supply chain diversification costs. Q5: What response has come from the Chinese government? Chinese officials have offered cautious acknowledgment while emphasizing mutual interests in stable economic relations. They continue advocating for reduced restrictions and more open trade policies. This post US China De-Risk Strategy: Treasury Secretary Bessent’s Crucial Shift from Economic Decoupling first appeared on BitcoinWorld .

13 Feb 2026, 18:26

Praetorian crypto founder Ramil Palafox sentenced to 20 years for $200m fraud

Ramil Ventura Palafox just got 20 years in federal prison. He ran a fake crypto company called Praetorian and scammed over 90,000 people across the world. A judge in Alexandria, Virginia, sentenced him after he got hit with wire fraud and money laundering charges. Ramil is 61 and holds passports from both the United States and the Philippines. He ran Praetorian Group International, also called PGI, where he called himself CEO, chairman, and the face of the whole thing. He told people PGI made money by trading bitcoin. He said they’d earn daily profits between 0.5% and 3%. That was a lie. PGI wasn’t trading enough bitcoin to even come close to those returns. Instead, Ramil paid early investors with new investors’ money. Ramil spent investor money on cars, homes, clothes, and fake websites Between December 2019 and October 2021, more than $201 million flowed into Praetorian. Over $30 million came in as fiat cash, and more than 8,000 bitcoin came in too, worth around $171 million back then. Out of that, at least $62.6 million is now confirmed as actual losses. Ramil didn’t spend that money on trading. He spent it on himself. He bought 20 luxury cars for about $3 million. That included Ferraris, Lamborghinis, Bentleys, BMWs, Porsches, McLarens, and more. He booked penthouse suites at fancy hotels and spent $329,000 doing that. He also bought four houses in Los Angeles and Las Vegas, worth over $6 million. Ramil also spent $3 million shopping at stores like Cartier, Gucci, Rolex, Versace, Neiman Marcus, Louboutin, and Hermès. He bought expensive clothes, watches, jewelry, and furniture. He also sent $800,000 and 100 bitcoin, worth $3.3 million, to one of his family members. To keep the fraud going, Ramil set up a fake PGI website. From 2020 to 2021, the portal showed fake profits. People would log in and see their investments “growing.” The numbers were all made up. No bitcoin was being traded like that. Investigators from the FBI Washington Field Office and the IRS Criminal Investigation team in D.C. followed the money trail, tracked the bitcoin, and connected every dollar back to Ramil and Praetorian. Ramil lied to tens of thousands of people. He promised returns that never existed. He used fake dashboards and flashy events to make it look real. But the cash went to his garage, his closet, and his houses. There was never any plan to make people money. Now, with Ramil behind bars for 20 years, the name Praetorian is going down in history for all the wrong reasons. Earn 8% CASHBACK in USDC when you pay with COCA. Order your FREE card.