Invest ideasNews
21 Jan 2026, 22:00
White House Pushes for Fast Crypto Deal as Senate Window Narrows and $1B Liquidations Rock Markets
The White House is urging U.S. lawmakers to move quickly on legislation to reform the crypto market structure as political timelines tighten and digital asset markets face renewed volatility. With the Senate struggling to secure bipartisan support and more than $1 billion in recent crypto liquidations, officials say the window for passing a workable regulatory framework may be closing. Patrick Witt, executive director of the President’s Council of Advisors for Digital Assets, has warned that expecting the crypto industry to operate without clear rules is unrealistic. He argues that some form of legislation is “inevitable” and that delays could leave the sector exposed to harsher policies in the future. White House Presses for Action on Crypto Rules The proposed Senate bill would define how the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) and the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC) oversee crypto markets , including stablecoins and decentralized finance protocols. However, disagreements over key provisions have slowed progress. Both the Senate Banking and Agriculture Committees recently postponed markups as lawmakers worked to resolve disputes and gather enough support to advance the bill. Witt has been blunt in his message to the industry: accept compromise now or risk facing a less favorable outcome later. He criticized Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong for withdrawing support for the current version of the bill, after Armstrong said the company would “rather have no bill than a bad bill.” Midterm Elections Add Pressure The push for speed is also tied to the November U.S. midterm elections, which could reshape Congress. All House seats and 35 Senate seats are up for grabs, and polling and prediction markets suggest Democrats have a strong chance of flipping the House. A divided Congress would likely slow or stall crypto legislation altogether. Witt has cautioned that the political alignment needed to pass a market structure bill may not be in place after the elections, making the coming months critical for any deal. $1B Liquidations Highlight Market Stress The policy debate comes as markets reel from a sharp deleveraging event. Today, more than 182,000 traders were liquidated in a single day, with total losses of over $1.08 billion. Most of the damage came from long positions in Bitcoin and Ethereum, as falling prices triggered cascading margin calls across major exchanges. Bitcoin alone saw over $427 million in long liquidations, while Ethereum accounted for roughly $374 million. Technical indicators show many altcoins trading with RSI levels below 50, suggesting continued selling pressure. Rising Japanese bond yields and renewed global risk-off sentiment have also tightened liquidity, prompting investors to shift away from volatile assets like crypto. Although Bitcoin later stabilized near $90,000, analysts say the recent rebound looks more like a pause after forced selling than a clear return to bullish momentum. Cover image from ChatGPT, BTCUSD chart on Tradingview
21 Jan 2026, 21:55
Tokenize ETF Shares: F/m Investments’ Bold SEC Proposal Could Transform Traditional Finance
BitcoinWorld Tokenize ETF Shares: F/m Investments’ Bold SEC Proposal Could Transform Traditional Finance In a landmark move for financial innovation, U.S. ETF manager F/m Investments has formally requested regulatory approval to tokenize ETF shares, specifically for its U.S. Treasury 3-Month Bill ETF (TBIL). This pivotal request, submitted to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in early 2025, represents the first formal application seeking relief for the tokenization of a registered investment company’s exchange-traded fund shares. Consequently, this proposal could bridge the established world of regulated securities with the evolving potential of distributed ledger technology. Decoding the Proposal to Tokenize ETF Shares F/m Investments’ detailed submission outlines a plan to record share ownership of its TBIL ETF on a permissioned blockchain ledger. This structure would fundamentally alter the mechanics of share transfer and settlement. Instead of relying solely on traditional clearinghouses, these processes would occur on-chain. The company emphasizes that this technological shift would not change the fundamental nature of the security. Each tokenized share will maintain identical characteristics to its traditional counterpart. Identical Rights: The same CUSIP identifier, voting power, and economic entitlements. Regulatory Compliance: Full operation within the Investment Company Act of 1940 framework. Oversight Preserved: Continued board governance, daily portfolio transparency, and independent third-party custody and auditing. This approach aims to enhance efficiency and accessibility while upholding the stringent investor protections of traditional funds. The permissioned ledger model, distinct from public blockchains like Ethereum, allows for controlled participation, addressing common regulatory concerns around security and anti-money laundering controls. The Broader Context of Asset Tokenization F/m’s initiative does not exist in a vacuum. It arrives amid a significant global trend toward the tokenization of real-world assets (RWA). Major financial institutions, including BlackRock and JPMorgan, have actively explored blockchain-based systems for bonds, private equity, and money market funds. However, applying this technology to a publicly traded, SEC-registered ETF within the U.S. regulatory perimeter marks a new frontier. The table below contrasts traditional and proposed tokenized ETF mechanics: Aspect Traditional ETF Proposed Tokenized ETF Ownership Record Centralized Depository (DTCC) Permissioned Blockchain Ledger Settlement Time T+2 (Trade date plus two days) Potential for Near-Instant (T+0 or T+1) Transfer Mechanism Brokerage & Clearinghouse Systems On-Chain Transaction Access & Divisibility Standard Share Units Potential for Fractional Ownership Regulatory Anchor Investment Company Act of 1940 Investment Company Act of 1940 This move follows the SEC’s approval of spot Bitcoin ETFs in January 2024, which demonstrated a cautious but evolving regulatory stance toward cryptocurrency-adjacent products. F/m’s request tests a different angle: using blockchain as a superior infrastructure for traditional securities, not merely as the basis for a novel asset. Expert Analysis on Regulatory Hurdles and Potential Legal experts following the SEC’s digital asset agenda note the significance of the request’s structure. “F/m is not asking to create a new product,” explains a former SEC attorney specializing in investment management. “They are asking for relief to use a new technological method for recording ownership of an existing, fully compliant product. This distinction is crucial. It frames blockchain as a utility, not the source of the asset’s value.” The firm’s emphasis on maintaining all existing investor protections and oversight mechanisms appears designed to alleviate common SEC concerns about market integrity and investor protection. Market analysts highlight potential impacts should the SEC grant approval. Primary benefits could include reduced operational costs, decreased settlement risk, and the possibility of 24/7 trading infrastructure. For investors, the most tangible early benefit may be the potential for fractional share ownership, making precise treasury bill exposure more accessible. However, the path forward involves rigorous scrutiny. The SEC will likely examine cybersecurity protocols, node governance of the permissioned ledger, interoperability with existing market infrastructure, and precise custody arrangements in extreme detail. Implications for the ETF and Digital Asset Industries The approval of this request would create a powerful precedent. Other ETF issuers could follow with similar applications for equity, fixed-income, or commodity-based funds. This could accelerate a industry-wide technological upgrade. Furthermore, it would establish a regulated blueprint for merging traditional finance with blockchain rails. Success here could spur more innovation in areas like programmable dividends or automated compliance checks embedded in the tokens themselves. Conversely, a rejection or a request for significant modifications would signal the SEC’s current limits on integrating distributed ledger technology into core securities markets. It would clarify the regulatory boundaries for other asset managers exploring similar concepts. The decision will serve as a critical indicator of whether U.S. financial regulation views blockchain primarily as a speculative threat or a viable operational improvement. Conclusion F/m Investments’ formal request to tokenize ETF shares represents a calculated and historic test of U.S. financial regulation’s adaptability. By seeking to apply blockchain technology to the bedrock of short-term government debt exposure through the TBIL ETF, the firm is pushing for a future where market efficiency and technological innovation coexist within a strong regulatory framework. The SEC’s response will not only determine the fate of this specific proposal but will also chart a course for the entire convergence of traditional finance and digital asset infrastructure. The move to tokenize ETF shares could ultimately redefine how ownership is recorded, transferred, and settled across global markets. FAQs Q1: What does it mean to tokenize an ETF share? Tokenization means creating a digital representation of an asset on a blockchain. For an ETF share, it involves issuing a digital token that corresponds to and confers the same ownership rights as a traditional share, but with ownership recorded and transfers processed on a distributed ledger. Q2: How is F/m’s proposal different from a Bitcoin ETF? A Bitcoin ETF holds Bitcoin as its underlying asset. F/m’s proposal involves taking an existing traditional ETF (which holds U.S. Treasury bills) and using blockchain technology to record ownership of its shares. The underlying asset remains U.S. government debt, not cryptocurrency. Q3: What is a permissioned blockchain ledger? A permissioned ledger is a blockchain network where participation is controlled. Only approved entities (like regulators, the issuer, authorized custodians, and brokers) can operate nodes or validate transactions. This contrasts with public, permissionless blockchains like Bitcoin, which are open to anyone. Q4: Would tokenized ETF shares be more risky for investors? According to F/m’s proposal, the tokenized shares would have the same protections as traditional shares, including board oversight, daily transparency, and third-party custody. The primary risk shift would be technological, relating to the security and resilience of the new blockchain infrastructure, which the SEC will rigorously assess. Q5: Could this lead to fractional ownership of ETF shares? Yes, one of the inherent potentials of blockchain-based tokens is divisibility. While the initial proposal may start with whole-share tokens, the technology could eventually enable investors to own precise fractions of a share, increasing accessibility and investment flexibility. This post Tokenize ETF Shares: F/m Investments’ Bold SEC Proposal Could Transform Traditional Finance first appeared on BitcoinWorld .
21 Jan 2026, 21:30
Supreme Court rejected Trump’s attempt to fire Fed Governor Lisa Cook
The Supreme Court has refused to support President Donald Trump in his attempt to fire Federal Reserve Governor Lisa Cook, after justices raised serious doubts about the legal grounds and the threat it posed to the Fed’s independence. Trump’s lawyers argued that Lisa could be fired “for cause” based on uncharged mortgage fraud allegations. They also claimed no court review was needed. That set off alarms inside the courtroom. Justice Brett Kavanaugh told Trump’s solicitor general, D. John Sauer, that the argument could seriously damage the Fed’s structure. He said the idea that “the president alone” can decide what counts as cause, with no process or legal check, would “weaken, if not shatter, the independence of the Federal Reserve.” Lisa sat inside the courtroom as this unfolded. She had sued Trump in September , saying his claim to fire her violated the Federal Reserve Act, which only allows firing “for cause.” The law doesn’t define the term clearly, but it’s always meant serious wrongdoing during someone’s time in office, not before. Justices question speed of firing and lack of hard evidence Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson pressed Sauer hard. She asked, “Do you have evidence other than the president’s view?” Sauer answered that Lisa’s presence was damaging to the Fed’s public image. Jackson wasn’t convinced. She asked if the public was really being harmed by her staying in her role while the case was still ongoing in district court. Justice Samuel Alito, one of the conservatives usually aligned with Trump, also showed doubt. He asked why the White House, the district court, and the appeals court all pushed the process forward so quickly. “Is there any reason why this whole matter had to be handled… in such a hurried manner?” Alito asked. He also said that when the issue was in the executive branch, it was dealt with “in a very cursory manner.” Lisa is the first Black woman to serve on the Fed board. She was first appointed by President Joe Biden in 2022, to complete an unfinished term. In 2023, Biden reappointed her for a full 14-year term. Trump didn’t mention her interest rate stance when he said he was firing her. He pointed instead to claims by Federal Housing Finance Director Bill Pulte that Lisa had lied on old mortgage applications. Those claims predate her time on the Fed board. No charges were filed. Lisa’s legal team says Fed is being treated like a political tool Lisa’s lawyer, Paul Clement, told the court there’s no reason to treat the Fed like any regular federal agency. He said the court itself had called the Fed a “uniquely structured, quasi-private entity” in a recent ruling. “There’s no rational reason to go through all the trouble of creating this unique, quasi-private entity… just to give it a removal restriction that is as toothless as the president imagines,” Clement said. He argued that if the removal rules had any actual power, then the Supreme Court should reject Trump’s request to fire her immediately. Judge Jia Cobb, who reviewed the case in district court, already ruled that Lisa can stay on the job for now. Cobb said Lisa has a strong case that Trump’s action violated the Federal Reserve Act. She wrote that the best way to read the “for cause” rule is to apply it only to actions that happen while someone is serving on the board, not to anything that came before. Also present in court was Fed Chair Jerome Powell, who is now facing a criminal investigation over his role in a multibillion-dollar renovation of the Fed’s Washington, D.C. headquarters. Powell said the investigation is politically motivated, pointing to Trump’s anger at the Fed keeping interest rates steady last year. Lisa supported Powell in that decision. After the hearing, she said, “This case is about whether the Federal Reserve will set key interest rates guided by evidence and independent judgment or will succumb to political pressure.” She added , “Research and experience show that Federal Reserve independence is essential to fulfilling the congressional mandate of price stability and maximum employment. That is why Congress chose to insulate the Federal Reserve from political threats, while holding it accountable.” Don’t just read crypto news. Understand it. Subscribe to our newsletter. It's free .
21 Jan 2026, 21:00
What’s The Beef Between Cardano And XRP? Here’s Why The Communities Are Clashing
A disagreement over US crypto regulation has spilled into public view, drawing the Cardano and XRP communities into an unexpected clash. The reason is the Digital Asset Market Clarity Act, a proposed bill intended to define how digital assets are regulated in the United States. The disagreement started after Charles Hoskinson openly criticized Brad Garlinghouse over his stance on the legislation, which led to pushback from prominent XRP community members. This comes just after reports have suggested growing frustration among lawmakers toward Coinbase over disagreements tied to the Clarity Act. Hoskinson’s Criticism And Garlinghouse’s Position In Full Context The tension came to the surface during a livestream in January 2026, where Hoskinson criticized Garlinghouse’s apparent support for advancing the Clarity Act despite its shortcomings. In the video, Hoskinson expressed skepticism about the bill’s direction and origins, remarking sarcastically, “And what we got is Elizabeth Warren wrote the bill, that’s leadership we can believe in.” He went on to challenge the idea that passing an imperfect bill is preferable to continued uncertainty, pointing directly to the position of Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse. Hoskinson questioned whether handing regulatory power to the same institutions that previously sued, subpoenaed, or shut down crypto businesses could truly be considered progress. Hoskinson’s remarks did not go unanswered. Vet, a notable XRP community member and XRP Ledger dUNL validator, reposted the video on X and criticized Hoskinson’s approach. Vet questioned why Hoskinson chose to publicly attack Garlinghouse instead of contributing constructively to the legislative process, writing, “How about focusing on helping shape the Clarity Bill instead of crashing out on Brad for no reason, Charles?” Why The Clarity Act Matters To Both Communities The Clarity Act is one of a few bills introduced during the current crypto-positive Trump administration that aims to bring structure to a regulatory environment that has been uncertain for years. The Clarity Act, in particular, was introduced to bring clarity around whether digital assets should be treated as securities or commodities and which agencies should oversee them. The bill represents a necessary step toward legal certainty and institutional participation. Supporters of XRP tend to see engagement with lawmakers as a practical route forward after years of legal battles. However, others like Charles Hoskinson are of a different notion. The Clarity Act is not without its issues. Sources close to the White House say the administration is considering pulling its support for the Clarity Act if Coinbase does not return to negotiations over stablecoin yield provisions. However, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong noted that Coinbase is actively working to find common ground with banks on yield-related issues. A similar Act, called the Guiding and Establishing National Innovation for US Stablecoins Act, or the “GENIUS Act,” was signed into law in 2025 by President Donald Trump as part of efforts to create better regulatory clarity towards stablecoins in the United States. Interestingly, Ripple CEO Brad Garlinghouse was part of the crypto industry leaders that expressed support for the Genius Act after it was signed into law.
21 Jan 2026, 20:55
Bitcoin climbs after Trump vows to keep US ‘crypto capital of the world’
Bitcoin rose alongside US equities on Wednesday after President Donald Trump said he hopes to sign market structure legislation for digital assets “very soon” during a World Economic Forum speech in Davos. The remarks helped lift sentiment across risk assets. Data from TradingView showed daily Bitcoin gains of about 1.7% around the time of the address, while the S&P 500 was up 0.5% . Trump signals near-term crypto legislation In Davos, Trump said he is working to “ ensure America remains the crypto capital of the world ,” adding that he had signed the “landmark Genius Act” into law. “Now, Congress is working very hard on crypto market structure legislation — Bitcoin, all of them — which I hope to sign very soon, unlocking new pathways for Americans to reach financial freedom,” he said, according to the World Economic Forum’s broadcast of the address. Trump also told attendees he would not use force to take over Greenland and predicted that “the stock market is going to be doubled.” He said the Dow Jones Industrial Average would “hit 50,000” and that the move would come “in a relatively short period of time.” Market reaction and price context Bitcoin attempted to extend a relief bounce around the Wall Street open as traders weighed the policy comments. Earlier in January, Cointelegraph reported a roundtrip in price action that took Bitcoin back near its 2026 starting level, closing a gap in CME Group’s Bitcoin futures market and leaving gaps above the price. Some market participants pointed to visible buy interest. Trader CW said “$BTC has a solid buying wall,” describing the support line as strong. Japanese bonds add a macro headwind Elsewhere, stress in Japan’s government bond market remained a global talking point. QCP Capital noted that after decades of near-zero rates, 10-year Japanese yields have risen to around 2.29%, the highest since 1999. The firm highlighted structural strains, including government debt exceeding about 240% of GDP and debt servicing projected to absorb roughly a quarter of fiscal spending in 2026. Trading resource The Kobeissi Letter said demand for Japanese government bonds was “crashing,” warning that the situation was deepening. QCP Capital cautioned that the spillover to global bonds positions Japan as a key volatility catalyst. What traders are watching next Analysts are focused on whether Bitcoin can hold recent local lows and build on the bounce. Daan Crypto Trades said it would be “good to have a bit of a wick below the yearly open” so that the level is taken out, after which traders can reassess. For now, the policy outlook and macro backdrop appear to be pulling in opposite directions. Signs of progress on US digital-asset rules offered a short-term lift, while rising Japanese yields and bond-market fragility kept broader risk sentiment in check. The next phase likely hinges on follow-through in Washington and whether macro pressures ease. If legislative momentum persists and global rate volatility stabilizes, traders say the backdrop for a more durable recovery could improve. The post Bitcoin climbs after Trump vows to keep US ‘crypto capital of the world’ appeared first on Invezz
21 Jan 2026, 20:50
Trump Fed Chair Vision: The Compelling Return to Alan Greenspan’s Monetary Policy Era
BitcoinWorld Trump Fed Chair Vision: The Compelling Return to Alan Greenspan’s Monetary Policy Era In a significant statement with immediate implications for financial markets, former President Donald Trump has explicitly identified Alan Greenspan, the influential Federal Reserve Chair from 1987 to 2006, as his ideal model for future central bank leadership. This declaration, made on [Date, Location], renews a longstanding debate about Federal Reserve independence and monetary policy direction. Consequently, analysts are scrutinizing these remarks as a clear signal of renewed pressure on the Fed to adopt a more growth-oriented stance, potentially through interest rate reductions. Trump’s Vision for a Federal Reserve Chair Former President Trump praised the monetary policy framework of the Greenspan era, specifically highlighting its perceived flexibility and growth-friendly approach. He articulated a desire for a Federal Reserve leadership that prioritizes economic expansion. This perspective is not entirely new, as Trump frequently criticized the Fed’s rate-hiking cycle during his presidency. However, his explicit endorsement of Greenspan as a template provides a concrete historical reference point for his policy preferences. Market observers immediately interpreted the comments as an effort to shape expectations for future Fed appointments and current policy decisions. The Legacy of Alan Greenspan’s Federal Reserve To understand the weight of Trump’s statement, one must examine Alan Greenspan’s tenure. Appointed by President Ronald Reagan, Greenspan presided over the Fed during a period of significant economic transformation, including the dot-com boom. His monetary policy was often characterized by a data-dependent, and at times pragmatic, approach to managing inflation and growth. Key pillars of the “Greenspan Standard” included: Pragmatic Flexibility: Greenspan was known for avoiding rigid monetary rules, preferring to assess a wide array of economic indicators. Forward Guidance: He helped pioneer the use of carefully worded public statements to steer market expectations. The “Greenspan Put”: A market perception that the Fed, under his leadership, would intervene to support asset prices during crises, notably after the 1987 stock market crash. Nevertheless, his legacy remains complex. Many economists credit him with guiding the U.S. through long economic expansions. Conversely, some critics argue that prolonged low interest rates in the early 2000s contributed to the housing bubble that precipitated the 2008 financial crisis. Expert Analysis: Historical Parallels and Modern Context Financial historians note that Trump’s call echoes a traditional tension between the White House and the Federal Reserve. Presidents often desire lower interest rates to stimulate job growth and investment, especially ahead of elections. The Fed, however, must balance this with its congressional mandate for price stability and maximum employment. Dr. Sarah Jensen, a professor of economic history at Columbia University, states, “Referencing Greenspan is strategically potent. It invokes an era remembered for strong growth and market gains, while glossing over the subsequent complications. This framing places immediate political pressure on the sitting Fed chair.” The current economic context is markedly different from the 1990s. The post-pandemic landscape has been defined by high inflation, prompting the Fed under Chair Jerome Powell to enact the most aggressive rate-hiking cycle in decades. Trump’s comments are widely seen as advocating for a pivot from this tightening phase toward a new cycle of easing. Implications for Monetary Policy and Markets The immediate impact of Trump’s statement is on market sentiment and political discourse. Bond markets may begin pricing in a higher probability of future rate cuts, especially if Trump’s electoral prospects strengthen. Furthermore, this public positioning could influence the calculus of current Federal Reserve officials, who are deeply aware of political pressures but staunchly defend their operational independence. Policy Aspect Greenspan Era (1990s Reference) Current Fed Context (2025) Primary Concern Managing post-Cold War growth, tech boom Taming post-pandemic inflation, ensuring a soft landing Interest Rate Trend Generally accommodative, with cautious hikes Recently peaked after aggressive hikes; cuts debated Political Pressure Moderate, with general bipartisan support Intense, with frequent public criticism from both sides Ultimately, the call for a “Greenspan-like” chair is as much about philosophy as personality. It advocates for a Fed that some view as more responsive to growth signals and potentially more sensitive to asset market performance. This stance will undoubtedly fuel ongoing debates about the optimal balance between central bank independence and democratic accountability. Conclusion Donald Trump’s explicit desire for a Federal Reserve chair modeled after Alan Greenspan has reignited a critical conversation about monetary policy’s future direction. By invoking the Greenspan era, Trump is applying significant political pressure for a shift toward interest rate cuts and a more flexible, growth-focused Fed. While the economic realities of 2025 differ vastly from the 1990s, this statement powerfully frames the upcoming policy debates and electoral discussions surrounding the crucial role of the Federal Reserve chair. The central bank’s path forward will hinge not on historical analogy, but on its response to contemporary inflation and employment data, all while navigating an increasingly politicized environment. FAQs Q1: Who is Alan Greenspan and why is he significant? Alan Greenspan served as the Chair of the Federal Reserve from 1987 to 2006, making him one of the longest-serving and most influential figures in modern central banking. He is often associated with a period of strong economic growth and a flexible, data-driven approach to monetary policy. Q2: What does Trump mean by a “growth-friendly” Fed? This typically refers to a monetary policy stance that prioritizes stimulating economic expansion and job creation, often through lower interest rates and ample liquidity, even if it means tolerating slightly higher inflation for a period. Q3: Can a President directly control the Federal Reserve’s decisions? No. The Federal Reserve is an independent entity within the U.S. government. While the President appoints the Chair and Board members (subject to Senate confirmation), the Fed makes its policy decisions based on its dual mandate from Congress, free from direct political instruction. Q4: How did markets react to Trump’s comments about the Fed chair? While specific, immediate market moves vary, such comments generally increase market speculation about future interest rate cuts. This can lead to lower bond yields and potentially boost stock prices, as investors anticipate cheaper borrowing costs. Q5: Is the current economic situation similar to when Greenspan was Chair? Not directly. The Greenspan era included the low-inflation boom of the 1990s. The current economy is emerging from a period of high inflation, requiring a different policy balance. The reference is more about philosophical approach than identical conditions. This post Trump Fed Chair Vision: The Compelling Return to Alan Greenspan’s Monetary Policy Era first appeared on BitcoinWorld .
