Rising oil forecasts amid Gulf disruptions could lead to increased market volatility and influence global economic stability and energy policies.

The post Major banks raise oil forecasts amid Gulf shipping disruptions appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The revised oil demand forecast underscores potential shifts in global energy strategies and market stability amid geopolitical tensions.

The post IEA cuts 2026 oil demand forecast by 1.6M barrels/day amid Middle East disruptions appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The intensified Russian offensive in Izium could hinder Ukraine's strategic focus and resource allocation, impacting broader conflict outcomes.

The post Russian forces advance on Izium, raising fears of large-scale destruction appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

BRICS' concerns over unilateral trade actions may drive a shift towards multilateralism, impacting global trade dynamics and asset markets.

The post BRICS finance, central bank governors: continue to have serious concerns with unilateral imposition of trade and finance-related actions appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

The diesel price surge may exacerbate inflation, impacting transportation costs and potentially leading to broader economic challenges.

The post US diesel hits record $6 a gallon amid Iran supply shock appeared first on Crypto Briefing.

Bitcoin Magazine

Ringleader of $245M Crypto Theft Pleads Guilty 

The man behind one of the biggest bitcoin thefts in history this week pleaded guilty.

Malone Lam, 22, a Miami resident from Singapore, on Tuesday admitted his role as ringleader of the international crime group which stole 4,100 bitcoins — worth over $230 million at the time — to fund a life of luxury. 

The U.S. Department of Justice said that from October 2023 and through at least May 2025, Lam and others hacked databases to steal crypto users’ information and con them into providing user logins and private keys. Bitcoin and other cryptocurrencies worth $245 million were taken in the theft. 

On one occasion, a co-defendant broke into a residence in New Mexico and stole a hardware wallet while Lam monitored the victim’s movements by hacking their iCloud account.

“This defendant led an international network that preyed on victims through deception, invaded their privacy, and stole hundreds of millions of dollars in cryptocurrency,” U.S. Attorney Jeanine Ferris Pirro said in a statement. 

“If you build a cybercrime empire, we will find you, dismantle your operation, and hold you accountable,” Attorney Pirro added. 

The DOJ said: “The Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations Act conspiracy used social engineering and occasional home break-ins to obtain information that allowed the conspirators to drain their victims’ cryptocurrency wallets.” 

The crimes started after a group of online gamers became friends before working together to commit the cybercrimes, the indictment read.

Lam and co-defendants laundered the stolen bitcoin and spent it on bottle service parties, private jet rentals, security guards, luxury handbags and watches, and properties in Los Angeles, the Hamptons, and Miami. 

The defendants would spend up to $500,000 a night on parties and give away designer handbags worth tens of thousands of dollars, Tuesday’s announcement read. 

Lam was arrested in 2024 at his rental home in Miami. 

This post Ringleader of $245M Crypto Theft Pleads Guilty  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Trezor Reveals Another Data Breach After Scammers Target Marketing Platform 

Trezor has warned that a data breach at the third-party marketing platform it uses for sending newsletters is leading criminals to target customers with phishing attacks. 

The top hardware wallet manufacturer said Wednesday that an unauthorized actor got access to Brevo’s system and sent emails to 347,000 Trezor customers. Brevo is a platform businesses use to send customer communications. 

Scammers managed to use Trezor’s domain name to send the email, making the phishing attempt all the more believable. The email contained a malicious link asking users to download an app and enter their wallet backup. 

The news comes after Trezor last month announced that data from 11,742 customers had been exposed after its third-party fulfillment partner, ShipMonk, was targeted. 

It then said last week that an additional 67,000 U.S. customers had their names, emails, phone numbers, shipping addresses and order numbers leaked in the breach. 

“We took down the domain at the DNS level within 20 minutes, preventing the link from working for anyone else and limiting access to 2,500 people who had clicked it before we took it down,” Trezor said on Wednesday. 

“These addresses might be potentially used for other phishing attacks in the future. No other Trezor system was touched,” Trezor added.

“We have suspended the Brevo account to stop further email distribution.”

Trezor reminded users that it never asks customers to ask for their wallet backups. 

Criminals have been targeting data this year, with scammers getting hold of customer information via crypto wallet Ledger’s payment processor Global-e to send phishing emails. 

Crypto wallet provider SafePal last month also announced a data breach that involved ​unauthorized access to about 39,798 customers’ order information, ‌including personal details such as names, addresses and purchase data.

This post Trezor Reveals Another Data Breach After Scammers Target Marketing Platform  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Updated Crypto Clarity Act Starts Circulating Days Before Key Vote 

A new draft of the long-awaited crypto Clarity Act has dropped with amendments.

As first reported by Eleanor Terrett from Crypto in America and Punchbowl’s Brendan Pedersen, the updated bill contains changes including requiring non-decentralized DeFi protocols to register with the CFTC, and changes around how credit unions deal in crypto, according to reporters. 

The specifics include that a decentralized finance app fails the test of being such a protocol test if someone can control or materially alter its functionality, if it doesn’t run solely on pre-established transparent encoded rules, or if someone can restrict or censor its use.

It also adds that a federal credit union may use a digital asset or distributed ledger system to perform, provide, or deliver any activity, function, product, or service it is otherwise authorized by law to perform.

Lawmakers were hoping a crucial vote on the crypto market structure bill would go ahead in August before their five-week recess. It was delayed and the Senate will now vote on it on September 15. 

The bill is not bipartisan yet, according to the reporters. Senate Republicans started circulating the updated legislation on Thursday. 

The Clarity Act drafts a framework to formally divide oversight between regulators, distinguishing which digital assets are securities, commodities or stablecoins. Crypto industry executives have long called for such rules to be in place. 

Though passed by the House of Representatives last July, it has been stalled this year, mostly because the banking lobby clashed with crypto companies over paying customers stablecoin yield. 

A new draft tackling the issue of ethics started circulating in July, banning government officials from promoting or making money from crypto — something Democrats have criticized the Trump family for doing. 

Despite the changes, a group of Democrats said the bill fell short and demanded amendments to the bill. 

Pro-crypto lawmakers have blasted Democratic politicians who they think are deliberately holding back the bill.  

President Donald Trump has urged lawmakers to get the legislation over the line. In August, he said that in order for the U.S. to remain the “undisputed leader in Bitcoin and crypto,” they had to pass the “very, very powerful legislation.”

This post Updated Crypto Clarity Act Starts Circulating Days Before Key Vote  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Nasdaq Invests $100M in Kraken Parent Company: Report 

Nasdaq Inc. is investing $100 million in crypto exchange Kraken’s parent company, Payward, according to reports. 

The deal — not yet announced by either party — will help build out structure for tokenized stocks, Bloomberg reported Thursday, citing people familiar with the matter. The deal values the crypto company at $21 billion, according to the report. 

It comes as Wall Street increasingly eyes up bitcoin and crypto-related infrastructure. Kraken has made deals this year and last with traditional finance firms and the S&P Dow Jones Indices in March made a deal to debut a new derivative contract on decentralized exchange Hyperliquid. 

Bloomberg’s report said that Kraken will distribute Nasdaq’s tokenized stocks on its own platform, giving customers the ability to own Nasdaq-listed stocks in a tokenized form. 

Wall Street has been eying up crypto companies and their infrastructure particularly because its interested in tokenizing assets like stocks. 

In January, the New York Stock Exchange said it was building a platform allowing traders to buy and sell tokenized versions of US-listed equities and exchange-traded funds and settle those trades on the blockchain, 24/7.

Just last week, Payward, the parent company of crypto exchange Kraken, and fintech company SoFi Technologies announced a deal to route SoFi customers’ crypto orders through Kraken’s institutional trading platform and list SoFi’s stablecoin on the exchange.

Under the agreement, SoFi will send its digital asset order flow to Kraken Prime, Kraken’s prime brokerage arm, which launched in 2025. 

Kraken — like other crypto exchanges — is pushing into the traditional finance world, allowing users to trade stocks, bonds and other assets. The company has sold its app as a “primary account for everything.”

This post Nasdaq Invests $100M in Kraken Parent Company: Report  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

Bitcoin Magazine

Bitcoin Suffers On Renewed US-Iran Fighting 

Bitcoin’s price slid on Thursday after the price of oil shot over $105 a barrel thanks to renewed tensions in the Middle East. 

The biggest and oldest cryptocurrency was recently trading for $77,208 after sliding as low as $76,748 — down more than 2% over the past day. 

Its dip came after Iran signaled that it had no intention of backing down against U.S. forces. The two countries earlier this week stepped up attacks in some of the heaviest fighting since the war started in February. 

Tehran-backed Houthis in Yemen this week hit Saudi Arabian assets, also pushing the price of oil up. 

War in the Middle East pushes oil prices higher and makes the chances of interest rate cuts lower because of inflation. Bitcoin has typically performed well in a low interest rate environment and has experienced sell-offs when the Federal Reserve pivots to hawkishness. 

The U.S. is currently in the grips of an affordability crisis and rising oil prices are a hot topic ahead of the midterm elections. U.S. President Donald Trump has reassured voters that prices will get under control. 

Federal Reserve Chair Kevin Warsh said at his first speech as leader of the central bank and said that inflation in the world’s largest economy had not come down enough. 

Traders are now pricing in an interest rate hike next week when the bank meets. 

Still,  bitcoin had one of its best runs in August after the U.S. Treasury said it would at least double the size of its liquidity-support buyback operations, in response to surging borrowing costs. 

The announcement hurt the dollar but non-yielding assets like bitcoin and gold have benefited. 

Despite previously trading in line with risk-on assets like tech stocks, bitcoin has this year traded more in tandem with gold as the so-called debasement trade becomes hot again. 

Investors have bought the largest cryptocurrency — along with the precious metal — to hedge against the dollar’s decline. 

This post Bitcoin Suffers On Renewed US-Iran Fighting  first appeared on Bitcoin Magazine and is written by Mathew Di Salvo.

White House digital assets adviser Patrick Witt has reduced the Senate's immediate choice on the CLARITY Act to “get on the bill and let's keep talking.”

The Sept. 15 vote is a cloture vote on the motion to proceed to H.R. 3633, scheduled to ripen at 2:15 p.m., according to the Senate floor schedule. Sixty votes would open debate and an amendment process.

Four days before that procedural test, Republicans released EHF26718, proposed substitute text for CLARITY that adds a Commodity Futures Trading Commission framework for protocols that call themselves decentralized while remaining under an identifiable party's control.

The change repairs part of the bill's regulatory architecture and gives negotiators a targeted response to concerns about DeFi and prediction markets.

No senator who raised prediction market and Tribal-sovereignty concerns has publicly said the substitute changed their vote. Presidential crypto ethics and stablecoin rewards also remain active disputes.

Republicans are patching the coalition's perimeter while leaving its decisive fights for another round of negotiations. Their immediate task is to persuade senators who may oppose today's text to preserve the process for changing it.

A CFTC-side DeFi patch

The new CLARITY Act draft is labeled an “amendment in the nature of a substitute intended to be proposed”. Its table of contents expands Section 20209 from the July draft's “Software developer protections” to “Software developer protections and non-decentralized finance trading protocols.”

That addition creates a CFTC-side framework for determining when a nominally decentralized protocol still has a controlling party subject to intermediary rules.

Section 10301 already instructed the Securities and Exchange Commission to address a “non-decentralized finance trading protocol,” while the revised Section 20209 gives the CFTC a corresponding assignment.

The operative distinction is control: describing a venue as decentralized would not necessarily keep intermediary obligations from attaching when an identifiable person or group administers it.

The July substitute already made one Section 20209 protection for administering a DeFi protocol or liquidity pool specific to spot transactions, so EHF26718's verifiable development adds a CFTC framework for controlled protocols.

In July, 12 Democratic senators warned that broad DeFi exemptions could shelter blockchain prediction markets from derivatives rules. They asked negotiators to limit any new exemption to spot-market provisions, preserve the Indian Gaming Regulatory Act and Tribal-state compacts, and prohibit CFTC registrants from offering sports wagers and casino-style contracts.

A CFTC test for controlled protocols addresses part of that concern by making it harder for a centrally controlled venue to obtain a regulatory pass through a DeFi label. The senators also asked for protections extending beyond protocol classification, leaving Tribal sovereignty and the treatment of event contracts in play.

Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Brian Schatz have separately urged the CFTC to consult Tribes and respect federal Indian gaming law as it considers prediction-market rules.

The revision can make those lawmakers easier to approach. As of Sept. 10, none of the July letter's signers had publicly attributed a change in position to EHF26718.

The coalition math is still unforgiving

Under the Senate's cloture rules, ending debate on a legislative motion requires 60% of the full Senate, or 60 votes when there are no vacancies. With 53 Republicans, perfect party unity leaves at least seven votes to find elsewhere.

The National Sheriffs' Association has already shown how a targeted concession can alter the coalition's perimeter. On Sept. 3, the group moved from opposition to a neutral position after changes addressing illicit-finance concerns.

The clearest public threat inside the Republican conference remains ethics. Semafor reported that Sen. Thom Tillis said the bill could fail unless the White House helps bridge the standoff over restrictions tied to public officials' crypto interests, while Sen.

Mike Rounds expressed pessimism about the bill's prospects. Their comments signal danger rather than a verified whip count, but they also expose the weakness in assuming all 53 Republicans will vote for cloture.

Stablecoin rewards form another coalition-level pressure point. The sponsors' section-by-section summary says permitted rewards may be tied to activities such as opening an account, making payments, and providing liquidity.

Banks argue that those programs can function like interest and pull deposits from the regulated banking system.

That dispute has moved into a public lobbying campaign, as crypto groups launched a late advertising push accusing banks of trying to eliminate stablecoin rewards.

The same constraint applies to the calendar. A floor date forces choices but leaves subsequent votes and potential reconciliation ahead, and September's Senate window was narrow. A successful motion to proceed would preserve that path and move the unresolved issues onto the floor.

A vote to keep negotiating the CLARITY Act

Witt's argument supplies the White House's bridge between an unfinished bill and a 60-vote procedural threshold. In his telling, senators should advance the measure because a failed motion to proceed would deny both parties the opportunity to seek amendments.

Holdouts may decide that withholding cloture gives them more leverage, or that the remaining ethics, stablecoin and Tribal-policy gaps are too large to defer.

Republican negotiators are simultaneously giving those senators a revised text to evaluate. The controlled-protocol framework and the sheriffs' shift to neutral show that discrete objections can move even while the central bargain remains open.

The strategy requires 60 senators to accept the distinction between continuing the process and approving the product.

Cloture would carry the ethics, stablecoin, and prediction-market fights into another round of amendments. Failure would end that strategy before the unfinished compromises reach the floor.

The post CLARITY Act’s biggest Senate vote could happen before the bill is actually finished appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Hardware-wallet makers Trezor and BitBox warned users on Sept. 9 about phishing emails impersonating their brands, urging recipients to avoid the messages' links and instructions.

Trezor said its third-party email provider had been breached and reiterated on Sept. 10 that its wallets remained safe.

Trezor identified an email titled “Critical Security Alert: STM32 Entropy Vulnerability” as a phishing attempt. The company said the message did not come from Trezor and told recipients not to click any link. The technical-sounding subject was part of the fake security alert, rather than a vulnerability announcement from the wallet maker.

In its Sept. 9 warning, Trezor said it had taken down the domain and was investigating how attackers accessed its legitimate domain. The following day, Trezor said its wallets were still safe and again described the incident as a breach at a third-party email provider.

BitBox issued its own impersonation warning on Sept. 9, telling users not to follow the phishing email's instructions while it investigated. In a subsequent update that day, BitBox said its preliminary review found it very likely that its newsletter provider had been compromised.

BitBox also said other Bitcoin companies had been targeted and appeared to share the same newsletter provider. BitBox said it had warned all newsletter subscribers, contacted the provider and reported the phishing domains.

Most phishing links appeared to have been taken down by the time of that update, according to BitBox, which said its investigation was continuing.

Keep recovery seeds private

The warnings concern emails impersonating wallet companies. Trezor's reassurance about its wallets does not make following a phishing message safe: its standing security guidance says anyone who obtains a wallet backup, also called a recovery seed, can move the funds.

Trezor tells users never to share that backup and to check official channels if they are concerned about a message or their wallet's security. Its guidance also advises avoiding suspicious links and attachments and downloading Trezor Suite only from its official website.

For recipients, the immediate response is to ignore the phishing emails' instructions and keep recovery words private. Any follow-up about the incident should be checked through the companies' official channels, rather than through links supplied by the suspicious email.

The post Attackers exploit fake STM32 vulnerability alert to target Trezor and BitBox holders appeared first on CryptoSlate.

LlamaRisk has proposed increasing borrowing costs for Ethena’s USDe across five Aave V3 markets, tightening the economics for positions that borrow the stablecoin and recycle it into yield-bearing sUSDe.

The Sept. 9 recommendation would increase USDe’s base variable borrow rate from 5% to 6% on Core, Plasma, Monad, Mantle, and Avalanche. It would also reduce Slope1 by one percentage point on every deployment.

At the utilization levels captured in the proposal, modeled borrower APRs would rise by 13 to 89 basis points across markets holding about $323.8 million of USDe debt against $1.18 billion supplied.

LlamaRisk framed the changes as recommendations and said they would be implemented through the Risk Steward process.

The increase is not uniform because the proposal changes two parts of the rate curve at once. The higher base pushes borrowing costs up, while the lower Slope1 offsets part of that move at each reserve’s utilization.

Avalanche, the most heavily utilized market in the snapshot, gets the largest offset and a 13-basis-point increase. Mantle, with the lowest utilization, absorbs nearly the full base-rate rise.

The change targets leveraged sUSDe positions. TokenLogic’s staged repricing program described borrowers recycling USDe into sUSDe to capture the spread between staking yield and Aave’s borrowing cost.

The program argued that a higher borrowing floor should reduce those loops and could lift the yield available to remaining sUSDe holders toward 5.3%, but only as loop-funded supply unwinds.

By Sept. 10, Aavescan’s sUSDe snapshot showed a 4.72% supply APY. Its Core, Plasma, and Monad market pages displayed USDe borrow APRs above that level. The Mantle and Avalanche pages did as well, leaving a simple borrow-and-stake loop with negative carry before incentives, transaction costs, and other frictions.

Borrower rates can change as utilization moves, so the proposal’s market-level APRs describe the modeled effect at the captured Sept. 9 conditions rather than fixed costs.

The post Rising Aave borrow rates threaten to flip Ethena’s USDe yield loops into negative carry appeared first on CryptoSlate.

On Sept. 9, Binance's pre-IPO perpetual contract for Anthropic traded above $2,100, reaching an implied value that exceeds $2.1 trillion based on Binance's estimated one-billion-share denominator.

Real traders are pricing exposure to Anthropic on Binance, but both the mark and the share-count convention behind the trillion-dollar figure belong to the contract, so the venue sets the price.

A DefiLlama snapshot at 14:45 UTC on Sept. 9 showed the contract at $2,168.26, with $26.1 million in open interest and $24.76 million in 24-hour volume. A later ByKaranteli snapshot put the mark at $2,122.74, recorded open interest up 6.1% over 24 hours, and counted about $243,000 in liquidations.

Those figures show measurable activity in a derivatives market, with tens of millions of dollars in contract activity producing a company-wide number measured in trillions.

What traders are pricing and why it is fragile

Binance Research said the contract briefly produced an implied value near $2 trillion in August and closed August 31 near $1.9 trillion when its price was multiplied by the exchange's estimated one-billion-share denominator.

The exchange's research arm described that level as roughly twice Anthropic's Series H valuation and around 30 times the revenue run rate used in its report.

One side is a continuously traded derivative quote multiplied by a provisional share count, and the other is a financing valuation negotiated for private securities.

Anthropic said its May 28 Series H raised $65 billion at a $965 billion post-money valuation and that its run-rate revenue had crossed $47 billion earlier that month.

Those May disclosures set a historical benchmark for company-announced financing and operating metrics, but they do not validate the denominator used by the perpetual.

Binance's contract announcement specifies an estimated one billion shares. Its accessible official announcement mirror says the actual total may differ and warns that Binance does not endorse the resulting implied value.

Traders are willing to take risk at prices that imply a substantial premium to Anthropic's May financing when the Binance denominator is applied.

The ANTHROPICUSDT contract cannot reference a widely observed stock price before Anthropic lists because no public Anthropic share index exists.

Binance's published method uses a 10-second average, reaches further back when transactions are sparse, and limits the mark's movement to 1% per second. This is price discovery for the Binance contract, shaped by its participants, collateral rules, and liquidity rather than by an equity market.

Binance permits up to 20x leverage on ANTHROPICUSDT. Its pre-IPO terms call for funding every eight hours at +0.005% per interval, while adverse moves or unmet margin calls can liquidate collateral.

Leverage lets traders express a position larger than the capital committed and can turn price moves into forced transactions. The Sept. 9 snapshots show positions were being opened and liquidated, although they do not show that liquidations caused the price to move or that the market could absorb a large order without moving.

The contract also does not represent ownership in Anthropic and is not sponsored or endorsed by the company. No public share price is pulling the pre-IPO mark back toward a redeemable underlying asset.

Coinbase's general explanation of pre-IPO perpetuals describes the broader market-structure constraint: private-share liquidity is fragmented, physical shorting is difficult, and a pre-IPO contract can diverge from private-market quotes or indicative IPO pricing, especially when trading is thin.

Together, those features make the market informative but not authoritative.

What can reset the anchor for Anthropic's price

A revised share count can change the contract's screen price without necessarily changing a position's value. Binance has documented that it may rescale both mark price and position quantity when a revised or actual denominator becomes available, while seeking to preserve notional value.

If the estimate rises from one billion shares to a much larger number, the per-contract quote can fall mechanically as the quantity rises proportionally. A trader who treats the quote as a stable share price could mistake that technical change for an economic loss.

OKX announced that it would change the estimated denominator for its own ANTHROPICUSDT contract from one billion to 10 billion. The exchange called the adjustment value-neutral and explicitly said it was unrelated to Anthropic's share count.

The larger economic reset will come from public information about the offering and from a listed market. Anthropic said on June 1 that it had confidentially submitted a draft Form S-1, while noting that the number of shares to be offered and the offer price had not been set.

Reports from Sept. 4 noted that marketing was expected to begin in mid-October at the earliest and that a public prospectus was expected in late September. The report cautioned that the timetable could change, and Anthropic declined to comment.

Public filings and an eventual offering can introduce a disclosed capital structure, a marketed price range and, after listing, an observable stock price. Binance says it may transition the pre-IPO instrument to a standard TradFi perpetual when it determines that a stable third-party index is available, with the mark gradually converging after notice.

ANTHROPICUSDT shows that traders will risk real capital on Anthropic exposure at extraordinary levels. But until an IPO supplies offer terms and an external index, its implied valuation remains a product of Binance's own market, leverage rules, and estimated denominator.

The post Binance pre-IPO contract pushes Anthropic to a $2.1 trillion implied valuation appeared first on CryptoSlate.

HIVE Digital Technologies said its Bitcoin-mining and GPU-cloud businesses generated more than $1 million in combined average daily revenue from Aug. 21 through Sept. 10, quantifying how much its AI pivot contributes to current operations.

GPU cloud produced about $100,000 a day over the period, according to HIVE’s Sept. 10 update. That means the AI business is generating operating revenue, but it accounted for less than roughly 10% of the reported total. Bitcoin mining supplied more than nine-tenths.

Mining still carries the transition

HIVE said it mined an average of about 12 Bitcoin per day during the period, equal to roughly 2% of global network production. The revenue figures are preliminary, unaudited management estimates, and the company tied the result to prevailing Bitcoin prices, network difficulty, and operating conditions.

The dollar value of mining output can change with Bitcoin’s price and network economics. GPU cloud gives HIVE an operating foothold in AI infrastructure, while mining still supplied most of its reported revenue during the period.

HIVE said it had closed more than $600 million in GPU-cloud total contract value year to date, combining signed customer agreements and letters of intent. The company warned that total contract value is not recognized revenue and does not guarantee future revenue.

That distinction follows August reports of a $350 million AI cloud agreement and the financing and execution demands of the related $185 million GPU buildout. The new disclosure shows the AI business generating revenue, but the much larger commercial pipeline still depends on delivery over time.

HIVE said those operations contributed less than 5% of the company's global daily revenue in August and that it intends to wind down mining at the facilities.

HIVE is evaluating whether to repurpose the sites for high-performance computing, the data-intensive infrastructure used for services such as AI. It has not said the conversion is complete, and its release cautioned that the wind-down and repurposing may not proceed as planned.

For now, the operating numbers show a two-speed transition. AI cloud has become a revenue-producing business, while Bitcoin mining remains the financial engine.

The next test is whether HIVE can turn more of its signed agreements and letters of intent, along with its existing infrastructure, into recognized GPU-cloud revenue without losing the mining cash flow carrying the shift.

The post Bitcoin mining supplies 90% of HIVE’s $1 million daily revenue despite ongoing AI expansion appeared first on CryptoSlate.

Bitcoin Tax Audit in Austria: What Proof the Tax Office Can Demand

Bitcoin transactions run over a blockchain - but the blockchain does not answer every tax question. It shows transfers between addresses, yet not automatically who owns a wallet, why a transaction took place, or which acquisition costs apply for tax purposes.

Anyone declaring larger bitcoin gains, or moving holdings across several exchanges and wallets, should therefore work with detailed documentation.

Acquisition costs matter most, because taxable realised gains are derived in principle from the difference between the sale proceeds and the tax cost base.

Purchase Records Are the Foundation

Where matters are unclear, the tax office may in particular want to trace:

• when the bitcoin was acquired,
• how many BTC were bought,
• at which euro price,
• through which platform,
• which fees arose,
• where the money used for the purchase came from.
• Suitable records can include, for example:
• exchange statements,
• CSV exports,
• bank account statements,
• purchase confirmations,
• tax reports.
• With long-held bitcoin in particular, the original purchase date can be decisive.

A Wallet Transfer Is Not Automatically a Sale

A transaction on the blockchain initially shows only that bitcoin moved from one address to another. When investors move bitcoin between their own wallets, they should therefore document that this really was a self-transfer and not a sale.

Helpful items are:

• the sending address,
• the receiving address,
• the transaction ID,
• proof of control over both wallets,
• the timing against exchange withdrawals or deposits.

This becomes especially relevant when coins are sold years later on a different platform.

Missing Acquisition Costs Can Get Expensive

Austrian crypto service providers need reliable acquisition data, among other things, in order to withhold capital gains tax correctly. Where such data is missing or the figures do not appear plausible, flat-rate tax rules can apply. The Austrian finance ministry has developed its own requirements for these transfer cases.

The same applies towards the tax office: a claim such as “I bought the bitcoin in 2018” is considerably more robust when old account records, exchange data or blockchain transactions can support it.

Document Crypto-to-Crypto Swaps as Well

The bitcoin may not have been bought directly against euros. Anyone who first bought another cryptocurrency and later swapped it tax-neutrally into bitcoin must be able to trace the carried-over cost base.

Austria does not in principle treat the swap of one qualifying cryptocurrency for another as a realisation. The acquisition costs are carried over to the cryptocurrency received. A tax audit can therefore reach transactions that took place years before the actual bitcoin sale.

The Price Source Can Matter Too

Not every crypto transaction settles directly against euros. For tax valuations, the Austrian rules set out an order of precedence for suitable price sources. Where particular exchange rates are unavailable, other market or dealer prices can be used. What matters is a consistent valuation method.

Anyone determining historical values themselves should therefore document which price source was used.

These Records Investors Should Secure

For robust bitcoin tax documentation, the following are particularly useful:

• complete transaction histories,
• purchase and sale statements,
• wallet addresses,
• transaction IDs,
• self-transfers,
• acquisition costs,
• acquisition dates,
• fees,
• the exchange rates used,
• tax reports,
• bank deposits and withdrawals.

Where wallet structures are complex, documentation that assigns every larger movement to a clear economic cause is advisable.

Conclusion

In a bitcoin tax audit, the blockchain alone is often not enough. The Austrian tax office must be able to trace when the bitcoin was acquired, which acquisition costs apply, and what lies behind later wallet transfers and sales. The older and more complex the transaction history, the more important exchange exports, account statements and cleanly documented wallet movements become.

XRP trades at $1.3525 as of 08:25 UTC on September 11, up a token 0.27% on the session but down 6.45% over seven days. That makes it the worst performer in the top five this week, worse than Bitcoin's 4.40% decline. Market cap sits at $85.31 billion with $2.54 billion in daily volume, and the year to date loss is a painful 26.26%.

Zoom out further and the number that matters is this: $XRP is still down roughly 63% from its $3.65 cycle high set in July 2025. August gave holders their best week in a year. September has been giving it back.

Why Is the XRP Price Falling This Week?

Two reasons, one shared and one specific to XRP.

The shared reason is the Federal Reserve. Markets are pricing roughly a 60% chance of a 25 basis point rate hike on September 16, a complete flip from the hold expectations of late August. Strong August payrolls at 162,000, core PCE at record highs and rising oil prices tied to the US and Iran conflict have all pushed yields up, and August CPI lands today. High beta assets get sold first in that environment, and XRP is high beta.

The XRP specific reason is the Senate. On September 15 at 2:15 p.m. Eastern the Senate holds a cloture vote on the motion to proceed to the CLARITY Act. This is not a vote to pass the bill, it is a procedural vote to allow debate, and it needs 60 votes. Republicans hold 53 seats, which means at least seven Democrats have to cross over.

The market does not believe it happens. Polymarket has put 2026 passage at around 20%, while Galaxy Digital and the Solana Policy Institute have both assigned roughly 10% odds before the midterms. Senator Cynthia Lummis has warned that failing now could push market structure legislation out to 2030. Former federal prosecutor Renato Mariotti has been blunter, calling the bill dead.

XRP rallied in August partly on CLARITY optimism. The last three weeks look a lot like that optimism being priced back out.

What Does the XRP Chart Show Technically?

The 3 hour chart splits into three clean phases.

1. The vertical move. XRP bottomed at $0.9877 on August 17 and then ran roughly 70% in three days, spiking to the $1.66 area on August 22. The green arrow on the chart marks the launch point at the $1.00 line. That candle on August 22 left a long upper wick, which is the signature of a move that ran out of buyers rather than one that found value. A leverage flush then dragged price back to $1.44 within days.
2. The grind down. Since August 23 the chart has printed a textbook sequence of lower highs: $1.55, then $1.50, then $1.47, then $1.46 on September 4, then $1.44 on September 9. Each bounce has been sold slightly earlier than the one before. That is distribution, not accumulation.
3. The test. The blue line is the 200 EMA at $1.34052. XRP is currently 0.9% above it and this is the first real test of that average since the August breakout. The current 3 hour candle has a range of barely one cent, opening at $1.34866 with a high of $1.35933 and a low of $1.34772. Compression that tight, directly on a major moving average, does not last.
4. Momentum. The 14 period RSI reads 34.90 with its signal line at 35.39. RSI dropped to around 25 overnight, which is deeply oversold, and has bounced from there. But it is still below its signal line, so the crossover has not confirmed yet. Oversold in a downtrend is not a buy signal on its own, it is just a reason the fall paused.

Which XRP Support Levels Matter Now?

This is where the chart gets genuinely interesting, because three different things land in almost the same place.

Take the August move from $0.9877 to $1.66. The 50% retracement of that rally sits at $1.324. The $1.30 line drawn on the chart sits just below it. The 200 EMA at $1.34052 sits just above it. So the zone from $1.30 to $1.34 is a triple confluence of a moving average, a round number and a Fibonacci retracement. Analysts tracking the coin have flagged the same $1.31 to $1.35 band as the support cluster.

Below that, the ladder is:

• $1.2445 is the 61.8% retracement, the so-called golden pocket
• $1.20 is the horizontal level drawn on the chart
• $1.00 is the breakout base and the psychological floor
• $0.9049 sits below the August cycle low and would only come into play in a full market breakdown

What Are the XRP Price Targets From Here?

• Bearish scenario. A 3 hour close below $1.34052 puts the $1.30 to $1.324 confluence in play immediately. Losing that zone on a daily close would mean the August rally has retraced more than half of itself, and the next real target becomes $1.2445, then $1.20. The trigger for this path is a hot CPI today plus a failed cloture vote on Monday. In that combination, $1.20 by the end of September is realistic.
• Base case. XRP defends $1.34, chops between $1.34 and $1.44 into the vote and the Fed, and the lower high sequence stays intact without breaking down. Given that two binary events sit four and five days out, this is the highest probability path for the near term.
• Bullish scenario. Reclaiming $1.40 on a 3 hour close is the first requirement. That opens $1.4650, the September 4 high, and then the $1.50 to $1.55 band that has capped every attempt since late August. Only a close above the $1.66 August spike high would genuinely flip the structure from lower highs to higher highs, and that would put the $1.80 area next.

XRP needs two things to go right to break up, a soft CPI and a surprise cloture pass, and only one thing to go wrong to break down. The chart is neutral. The event calendar is not.

So is this a buying opportunity? On the chart alone, not yet. Buying here means buying into an intact sequence of lower highs with two binary events unresolved, and the level that would actually confirm the trend has turned is $1.66, not $1.35. The setup becomes far more attractive in two specific cases: a reclaim of $1.40 that holds on a daily close, or a flush into the $1.24 to $1.30 zone that produces a clear rejection candle. Neither has happened yet.

Why Are XRP ETF Inflows Not Lifting the Price?

This is the most interesting divergence in the market right now.

US spot XRP ETFs took in $110.49 million in the week ending August 28, their strongest week of 2026. Cumulative inflows stand at roughly $1.66 billion. Yet the price has fallen through that entire period.

Two explanations. First, flows slowed sharply: $18.96 million for the week ending September 4, then just $1.55 million on September 8. The institutional bid is still there but it has thinned out dramatically.

Second, and more structural, there is the escrow. Ripple releases 1 billion XRP from escrow each month and re-escrows 600 to 800 million of it, meaning 200 to 400 million XRP enters circulation monthly. At current prices that is roughly $270 million to $540 million of new supply every month, against an ETF complex that absorbed $18.96 million in its most recent measured week. The demand side has to run several times faster than it currently is just to offset issuance.

That gap is the honest answer to why good ETF headlines keep failing to move the price.

What Should XRP Traders Watch Next?

Three dates, in order of importance for XRP specifically:

1. August CPI, September 11. Decides whether XRP tests $1.34 from above or below going into the weekend.
2. CLARITY Act cloture vote, September 15 at 2:15 p.m. Eastern. The single largest XRP specific catalyst of the quarter. Failure is the base case, so a pass would be the upside surprise rather than the reverse.
3. Fed decision, September 16. A hike is priced. A hold would be a genuine shock and the strongest broad market catalyst of the month.

Until those clear, $1.34 and $1.40 are the only two numbers that need watching.

$Bitcoin is trading at $77,289 on September 11, down 4.40% over the last seven days and 1.10% in the last 24 hours. Market cap sits at $1.55 trillion with $30.02 billion in 24 hour volume. Zoom out and the picture gets less comfortable: $BTC is down 11.66% year to date, which means everyone who bought on January 1 is still underwater.

But the weekly candle is only half the story. The chart shows a market that has been grinding sideways for three weeks after a violent rally, not one that is falling apart. Here is the full technical breakdown.

Why Did the Bitcoin Price Drop 4% This Week?

The drop has almost nothing to do with crypto and almost everything to do with the Federal Reserve.

Traders spent the week pricing in a rate hike. The CME FedWatch tool has been showing roughly a 60% probability that the Fed raises rates by 25 basis points at the September 16 meeting, a complete reversal from the hold expectations that dominated in late August. Strong August jobs data, record high core PCE and rising oil prices tied to the conflict in Iran all pushed yields higher, and higher yields are poison for an asset that pays no interest.

On top of that, August CPI is released today at 08:30 Eastern. Nobody wants to be caught with size on the wrong side of an inflation print that could decide the Fed meeting five days later, so the market de-risked. The Crypto Fear and Greed Index fell from 74 a week ago to 56, which is still Greed, but noticeably cooler.

Worth noting: spot Bitcoin ETFs still pulled in roughly $987 million in the week ending September 4. This is a positioning pullback ahead of a macro event, not a demand collapse.

What Does the Bitcoin Chart Show Technically?

The 3 hour chart tells a very clean story if you read it from left to right.

1. The rally. Bitcoin bottomed in the $62,277 to $65,000 zone in mid August and then went nearly vertical, adding roughly 30% in about two weeks to print $82,283 on September 3. That move was almost all impulse and almost no consolidation, which matters enormously for the downside scenario later in this article.
2. The rejection. The red arrow on the chart marks September 4, where a long upper wick killed the breakout attempt and BTC fell straight back into the range. This was the fourth rejection in the low $82,000s since August 25.
3. The range. Since then Bitcoin has oscillated between roughly $76,800 and $82,300, with the orange $78,670 line acting as the pivot. That level was support for three weeks. It is now resistance, and price is currently sitting underneath it.
4. The 200 EMA. The blue line on the 3 hour chart sits at $76,121. Bitcoin is currently 1.5% above it. This is the single most important number on the chart right now, because BTC has not closed a 3 hour candle below that EMA since the August breakout began.
5. RSI. The 14 period RSI reads 38.04 with its signal line at 35.28. RSI dipped close to 28 on the overnight flush, which is oversold territory, and has since curled back above its moving average. That is a short term momentum shift in favour of buyers, though RSI below 50 still means the broader momentum regime is bearish.

Notice also the price action of the last few hours: a tiny 3 hour candle with a $238 range, opening at $77,215 and closing at $77,289. That is compression right on top of support, and compression on support usually resolves violently in one direction. The CPI print is the trigger.

Which Bitcoin Support Levels Matter Now?

In order of importance:

• $76,121 is the 200 EMA on the 3 hour and the line in the sand for the short term structure
• $74,450 is the last horizontal level with real history behind it before an air pocket
• $66,803 and $65,000 mark the pre breakout consolidation zone
• $62,277 is the August floor

The gap between $74,450 and $66,803 is the dangerous part. Because the August rally was a near vertical impulse, there is almost no traded volume in that band. Price moves fast through zones where nobody has a cost basis to defend.

What Are the Bitcoin Price Targets From Here?

• Bearish scenario. A 3 hour close below $76,121 invalidates the post breakout structure and opens $74,450 quickly. If $74,450 goes, the measured move from the $82,283 high through that level projects roughly $66,650, which lines up almost exactly with the $66,803 horizontal. That is the realistic bear target, and it would require a hot CPI plus a Fed hike to get there.
• Base case. Bitcoin holds $76,121, chops between $76,000 and $78,670 through the Fed meeting, and nobody makes money. Given that the market is waiting on two dated events, this is arguably the highest probability outcome for the next five days.
• Bullish scenario. A 3 hour close back above $78,670 flips the pivot and puts $80,000 back in play immediately. Above that, $82,283 is the ceiling that has held four separate times since August 25. A daily close above $82,283 would be the first genuine breakout signal since the rally began, and the next meaningful target would be the $87,497 area, which is also Bitcoin's break even level for 2026.

The honest read: the chart is neutral inside a range, and the direction will be decided by macro rather than by the candles. The levels above are where to act, not predictions of what happens.

How Did Altcoins Behave While Bitcoin Fell?

Most of the majors did worse than Bitcoin, which is the usual pattern in a risk off week.

Ethereum held up relatively well at $2,468, down only 1.77% on the week, though it remains the worst large cap performer of 2026 with a 16.81% year to date loss. BNB was the most stable major at $715, down just 0.91% over seven days. Solana slipped 3.90% to $99.86 and lost the psychological $100 mark. XRP was the clear loser among the top five, down 6.45% on the week and a brutal 26.26% year to date at $1.35.

The interesting part is where money did go. TRON gained 3.19% on the week and is up 19.14% year to date, one of the few majors in the green for 2026. Zcash jumped 14.67% over seven days to $1,111 and is up 116.82% this year, though it gave back 8.77% in the last 24 hours. Hyperliquid fell 7.06% on the week but still holds a 214.74% year to date gain.

So this was not a market wide exit. Capital rotated into privacy and select high beta plays while the majors bled. That is a sign of a market that is still risk seeking internally, even while it de risks against the Fed.

What Should Traders Watch Next?

Three dated events decide the next leg:

1. August CPI, September 11. A soft print sends BTC back to test $78,670 and possibly $80,000. A hot print tests $76,121.
2. Senate vote on the CLARITY Act, September 15. Prediction markets are pricing low odds of the bill being signed in 2026, so this is more of a downside risk than an upside catalyst.
3. FOMC decision, September 16. A hold would be a genuine surprise given current pricing and would likely be the strongest bullish catalyst of the month.

Until those resolve, $76,121 and $78,670 are the only two numbers that matter.

Binance is removing the Pax Dollar stablecoin (USDP) from its platform altogether. The exchange announced the move on September 10, 2026 at 06:00 UTC. For holders in the European Economic Area, though, the date in the headlines is not the one that matters. Spot trading ends on September 24, and for EEA users that market had been closed for a year and a half anyway. Your date is a different one: you can withdraw USDP from Binance until November 24, 2026, 03:00 UTC. After that, the exchange decides what happens to any remaining balance, and it commits to neither a destination asset nor a rate.

Between those two dates sits a second, quieter deadline that the English-language coverage has largely missed: Binance Convert for USDP also closes on September 24. For EEA users, Convert was the last remaining way to swap a USDP balance into something else inside the exchange. Once it goes, the only route left until the end of November is a withdrawal to an external address. This article sorts out the dates, explains why holders in the EEA ended up in this position at all, and shows what you can do with a leftover balance.

What Binance is doing with USDP and which deadline counts for you

A delisting is the removal of a token from an exchange's trading line-up. The token does not disappear from the world, it disappears from that one platform. With USDP, Binance goes a step further than in a routine delisting: the exchange is winding down every service around the token in stages, from lending to yield products to the payment function, and at the end it closes deposits and withdrawals as well.

USDP, short for Pax Dollar, is a US dollar-pegged stablecoin issued by the New York issuer Paxos. A stablecoin is a token whose price is meant to track a currency, as a rule backed by cash and short-dated government bonds held at the issuer. Its price therefore barely moves, and whoever holds it effectively holds a dollar placeholder on a blockchain.

To gauge how much of it is still in circulation, we queried two independent trackers on September 10, 2026 at 12:37 UTC. CoinPaprika lists USDP in rank 503 with a market capitalization of around $29.1 million, a price of $0.9979 and daily turnover of roughly $6.2 million, 64 percent above the previous day. DefiLlama independently reports around $29.0 million in circulation at a price of $0.9955. The two counts sit close together, so the price is slightly below a dollar, in a range of about $0.9955 to $0.9979. That is a snapshot and explicitly not a price statement for the weeks ahead.

For a sense of the order of magnitude: Paxos now runs a second, far larger stablecoin in USDG, which DefiLlama data puts at around $3.25 billion. USDP amounts to less than one percent of that. This delisting therefore hits a token that has shrunk over the years, not a market leader.

The USDP timetable from the first lending freeze to the last withdrawal

Binance is not shutting the services down in one go but in several waves over a good ten weeks. The dates below come from the exchange notice of September 10, 2026; all times are in UTC, and central European summer time runs two hours ahead.

September: the products fall away

It starts on September 11. At 03:00 UTC the one-click buy and sell function disappears, at 06:00 UTC margin lending ends. On September 16, Binance Pay and the mining pool follow at 03:00 UTC, flexible lending along with VIP loans at 07:00 UTC, and margin trading at 10:00 UTC. On September 17, spot copy trading ends at 03:00 UTC; open positions are closed at the market price or, where that is not possible, moved into the spot account. At 07:00 UTC the same day, Binance Earn closes: flexible and locked products are unwound automatically and credited to the spot account together with accrued earnings.

On September 23 at 02:00 UTC, the conversion of dust balances ends. September 24 is then the day trading itself stops: spot trading, trading bots and Gift Card are dropped, and open orders are removed automatically. For Binance Convert, the sources give 02:00 or 03:00 UTC on that day. Anyone relying on that function should therefore not leave it to the last hour but allow a day's buffer.

From September 25: only out, no longer in

On September 25 at 03:00 UTC, Binance switches deposits off. More precisely: transfers arriving after that point are no longer credited. Anyone sending USDP to their Binance address from then on does not have a balance, they have a problem. That is the moment the exchange becomes a one-way street.

Why EEA holders have been unable to trade USDP since March 31, 2025

For the deadlines to make sense, a piece of the backstory belongs here. On March 31, 2025, Binance removed nine stablecoins from trading for users in the European Economic Area in order to comply with MiCA, the European crypto regulation. The affected tokens were USDT, FDUSD, TUSD, DAI, AEUR, UST, USTC, PAXG and USDP. Trading pairs in MiCA-compliant stablecoins such as USDC and in euros were untouched, and Binance advised affected users at the time to swap their holdings into USDC, EURI or euros.

MiCA, the regulation on markets in crypto-assets, requires issuers of asset-referenced tokens to hold an EU authorization and to report regularly on their reserves, among other things. Anything that fails those requirements may no longer be offered for trading on European platforms. Which issuers have cleared that bar is broken down in our MiCA register of stablecoin issuers.

What matters for the current situation: the 2025 step took away European users' ability to trade, not their ability to hold. Holding, depositing, withdrawing and the Convert function were explicitly left in place. That is exactly why the most likely case today is a leftover balance that has sat untouched on the account for a year and a half: selling was not possible, and nobody saw a reason to clear it out. For that leftover balance, the September 24 headline deadline is irrelevant, because trading had long been closed to you anyway.

Binance Convert closes first and is the quiet September deadline

Binance Convert is the swap function alongside the order book: you pick two assets, are shown a rate and swap at a fixed price, with no order and no spread arithmetic. For EEA users it had been the only way since March 2025 to turn a blocked stablecoin into something tradable inside the exchange.

That door closes on September 24, 2026. After that the balance is still sitting on the account, but it can no longer be converted within Binance. In practice: if you would rather hold your USDP remainder as USDC or as euros on the exchange, the end of September is the last moment for it. Miss it, and until the end of November the only route left is the one out, meaning a withdrawal to a wallet or to another platform.

Whether the Convert function for USDP is in fact still available in your account depends on your country of residence and your verification status. You can check that in a minute by setting up a swap of a very small amount in your account without confirming it. If the interface shows a rate, the route works. If a restriction message appears, plan straight for a withdrawal. Anyone thinking about a move anyway will find the providers that operate under regulatory supervision in our comparison of regulated crypto exchanges.

November 24, 2026 is the hard cut-off for the USDP withdrawal

On November 24, 2026 at 03:00 UTC, USDP withdrawals from Binance end. That is the date that counts for a holder in the EEA, and it is a good ten weeks away. Until then you can send your balance to an address of your choosing, to a wallet of your own or to another platform that accepts USDP.

Three things matter in practice. First, the network has to match: USDP exists on several blockchains, and a withdrawal on the wrong network lands at an address that does not know the token. Second, a withdrawal fee applies, and on a small remaining balance it quickly eats a noticeable share. With very small amounts it can therefore be cheaper to swap via Convert before September 24 and withdraw the proceeds bundled with other holdings. Third, the old rule applies to every withdrawal: a test transfer with a tiny amount first, then the rest.

You may know this pattern from earlier cases. When Binance dropped four tokens in the summer of 2026, the process followed the same script; we traced it in the Binance withdrawal deadline for ALCX, ARDR, NFP and POND. The delisting of ICX, SCRT and STORJ in August followed the same sequence. The difference here: with those tokens, trading ended first for everyone, whereas with USDP trading was never the issue for you.

What happens from November 25 and what Binance does not promise

From November 25, 2026, 03:00 UTC, Binance reserves the right to convert remaining USDP balances into another stablecoin. It is worth reading closely what that says and what it does not.

The exchange does not name the target stablecoin. No conversion rate is promised either. And the exchange frames the conversion as a possibility, not as a commitment. Should a conversion not be feasible, Binance says it will keep the withdrawal open as far as the network allows. That is a safeguard in users' favor, but it hangs on a condition that sits with the exchange and not with you.

Anyone writing or reading that remainders will automatically be converted into USDC is going beyond the source. What is documented is only this: Binance can convert, guarantees neither destination nor rate, and otherwise keeps the withdrawal open as long as that remains technically possible. Staking a leftover balance on a condition of that kind is a bet with nothing behind it.

Does that make USDP worthless? What Paxos says about redemption

No, and this point separates the case cleanly from other shutdowns. A delisting at Binance ends neither the token nor the issuer. Paxos continues to issue USDP, and according to the company every token remains redeemable at one US dollar, backed by cash and cash equivalents. There is no announcement that Paxos is ending redemption because of Binance's decision.

That is a different matter from a network shutdown of the kind announced for individual blockchains recently. There the token really does become inaccessible if you miss the deadline. Here you are not losing value, you are losing a place of custody. Anyone who withdraws USDP from Binance holds a working stablecoin somewhere else afterwards. That takes the panic out of it without making the deadline any less real: a balance that after November 24 is decided on by the exchange rather than by you is still one you are better off moving beforehand.

Where to put the remainder: another exchange, euros or your own wallet

There are essentially three destinations for a USDP balance, and which one fits depends on what you were planning to do with the money anyway.

A swap inside Binance while Convert still runs

The most convenient route, but the one with the earliest deadline. Anyone swapping into euros, USDC or another tradable asset by September 24 saves the withdrawal fee and the whole network question. For small remainders under about fifty euros this is usually the most sensible option, because a separate withdrawal otherwise costs a substantial share of the amount.

A move to another platform

Anyone wanting to keep USDP as a dollar position sends it to an exchange that still carries the token. Watch two things: that the destination platform actually accepts USDP on the chosen network, and that it operates under regulatory supervision. The second point has not been a side issue since MiCA, because it determines which products are open to you there at all.

Self-custody in a wallet of your own

Self-custody means the private keys are held by you and no service provider sits in between. A deadline like this one makes the argument for it: the token's price has not changed, the rules of the platform it was sitting on have. Anyone wanting to hold USDP for the longer term is independent of an exchange's product decisions with a wallet of their own. The price for that is responsibility, because a lost recovery phrase cannot be restored by anyone.

Tax in Germany: why swapping a stablecoin counts as a disposal

One point tends to get overlooked with stablecoins precisely because the price barely moves: for tax purposes, swapping one crypto-asset for another or for euros is a disposal, not a neutral rebooking. Whether tax arises from it depends on the holding period and on the result. Anyone who has held the position for more than a year sits inside the tax-free range under the German rules on private disposal transactions, and with a USDP remainder from the MiCA switch of March 2025 that is the likely case.

The transaction should still be documented. A swap you carry out in September appears in the 2026 tax return, and the proof of the holding period is on you. A gain or loss from the dollar movement can matter too if you sell inside the one-year period. Which tools log transactions cleanly and produce a report for the tax office is shown in our comparison of crypto tax tools. That does not replace binding advice: for an individual case, the route leads to a tax adviser.

Check in five minutes whether the USDP delisting affects you

Most readers are not affected by any of this, because they have never held USDP. A quick look is still worth it, precisely because a remainder from the days before the MiCA switch can sit unnoticed.

Sign in to your Binance account and check the balances in the spot wallet for USDP. Turn off the filter for small amounts while you do, otherwise exactly the remainders this is about will disappear. Think of holdings outside the spot account as well: amounts locked in Earn products are booked back to the spot account automatically, but not until September 17. Anyone looking before that will find them elsewhere.

If you find nothing, the topic is closed for you. If you find something, note two dates: September 24 for the swap inside the exchange and November 24 for the withdrawal. And anyone regularly active on several platforms should make that check a habit. Delistings arrive with a few weeks' notice, and a notice that appears at six in the morning on an English-language announcement page reaches hardly anyone by itself.

Withdrawing USDP from Binance: what you take away

1. Check today whether a USDP remainder is sitting in your account. Show small amounts, and look inside Earn products too. If you are reconsidering the provider anyway, the comparison of regulated crypto exchanges helps with the assessment.
2. Decide before September 24 whether you swap or withdraw. With very small amounts a swap via Convert is usually cheaper, with larger ones the move is worth it. Anyone wanting to hold the position themselves for good will find suitable devices in the hardware wallet comparison.
3. Document the transaction for the 2026 tax return. Date, amount, value and destination platform are the minimum; a tax tool or portfolio tracker takes the logging off your hands.

The actual finding behind this case is unspectacular and therefore easy to miss: a balance on an exchange is a claim against a company whose product policy can change. The token still has its value, access to it had an expiry date. Between those two sentences lies the reason deadlines like November 24 can hurt at all.

Sources: Binance exchange notice on the USDP delisting of September 10, 2026 (announcement at Binance) and the timetable write-up with Paxos context at crypto.news. Market figures from our own query at CoinPaprika and DefiLlama, September 10, 2026, 12:37 UTC.

(As of September 10, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

Since September 9, 2026, customers of BW-Bank have been able to buy and sell crypto assets through their existing securities account. Access runs through BW Nextbroker, while execution and custody sit with the Austrian provider Bitpanda. Anyone planning to use it should settle three questions first: who the contractual counterparty is, where the crypto assets actually sit, and who declares the tax. All three answers turn out differently from what the familiar securities-account setting suggests.

What BW-Bank has offered since September 9, 2026

The LBBW group is extending its work with Bitpanda Enterprise into retail banking. Until now the partnership, agreed in April 2024, covered corporate banking, with custody and trading for companies. After a pilot phase that started in late July 2026 and was open to selected retail clients at first, the offering is now open to BW-Bank retail customers in Germany.

Rainer Zeeb, head of the securities department at BW-Bank, is quoted in the release of September 9 saying the cooperation gives customers convenient access to crypto assets. Nadeem Ladki, Global Head of Bitpanda Enterprise, places digital assets as a fixed part of the investment world. Bitpanda supplies the technical infrastructure for trading and custody through the relevant group company.

The move stands out because this is a Landesbank, a German state bank, and not a neobroker. Crypto custody is a licensed activity in Germany, and since MiCA has applied in full across the EU, only authorised providers may offer crypto services. Bitpanda says it has held a MiCA licence from BaFin since January 2025. The bank therefore does not act as custodian; it opens a route inside its own interface.

The ten crypto assets available in BW Nextbroker

BW-Bank's product page names the tradable assets. There are ten of them: Bitcoin (BTC), Ethereum (ETH), Ripple (XRP), Solana (SOL), Litecoin (LTC), Chainlink (LINK), Cardano (ADA), Tron (TRX), Polkadot (DOT) and Hedera (HBAR).

That selection is small next to what specialist trading venues list. For most investors it covers the bulk of the market by market capitalisation. Anyone who wants to hold one particular smaller token will not find it here and will still need an account with a specialist crypto exchange. Whether the list will be extended, the bank does not say.

The route in comes with conditions. You need a securities account at BW-Bank and an activated Nextbroker login. From Nextbroker you are forwarded to the integrated Bitpanda platform, where buying, selling and administration take place. The bank's regular Nextbroker page, incidentally, does not carry crypto assets in its own list of products; it names equities, bonds, ETFs, funds and certificates. Crypto sits there as a separate menu item of its own.

Your counterparty is Bitpanda, not the bank: what that means for you

The most important sentence in the whole offering stands in the bank's own notes. The contractual counterparty for the crypto business is Bitpanda GmbH, or a group company named in its terms of business. BW-Bank is explicitly not a party to that agreement.

This is not a formality. It answers the question of whom you turn to in a dispute. With a faulty securities order the bank is your counterpart, and the familiar routes of complaint and arbitration apply. With a crypto order in the same interface it is the crypto service provider. The term that describes this is intermediation: the bank provides the access, the contract forms between you and the provider.

In practice that means reading Bitpanda's terms of business before you place your first order, not your bank's. They set out which law applies, which entity you are dealing with and how complaints are handled. That the same construction now turns up at several German institutions is something we worked through on September 6 for Sparkasse and Volksbank; the fee models there differ considerably from trading on an exchange.

Custody without your own wallet: who holds your keys

Bitpanda holds the crypto assets you buy. That puts the private key with the provider, not with you. In technical terms this is custodial storage: a third party holds the keys and keeps internal records of who is owed what amount. The counterpart would be self-custody on a hardware wallet of your own, where nobody but you has access.

For many newcomers custody by a provider is the more comfortable route, because no key can go missing. The price for that is counterparty risk: if the custodian runs into difficulty, access to your holding hangs on how that is wound up. Anyone who does not want that needs the option of moving holdings out to an address of their own.

And this is exactly where a question stays open. BW-Bank's product page says nothing about withdrawals to an external wallet. It describes buying, selling and administration within the platform. Whether a transfer to an address you control is possible, and on what terms, is something you have to clarify with the bank or in the provider's conditions before your first purchase. For self-custody that is the decisive question.

Order limits in the securities account: 1 euro minimum, 50,000 euros per trade

The bank names clear amount limits for crypto trading. The minimum stake per order is 1 euro. At the top end a single order is capped at 50,000 euros, and 500,000 euros are possible per day.

The low minimum amount is practical for small, regular purchases. The daily cap will never become an issue for the vast majority of retail investors. More relevant is the limit per order for anyone who wants to move larger amounts in one go: a position of 120,000 euros cannot be built in a single step but breaks into several orders, each with its own transaction fee and its own execution price.

Anyone who wants to buy on an ongoing basis should also check whether an automated savings plan is offered or whether every instalment has to be triggered by hand. The product page describes single orders; it does not list a crypto savings plan.

What the transaction fee costs, and why the bank does not name it

For every executed crypto order, buy as well as sell, BW-Bank says a transaction fee is charged by Bitpanda. The bank does not give a figure for it. It points to the provider's fee page.

That is an important difference from the securities business, where the bank's schedule of prices and services fixes the costs. With crypto assets, pricing authority sits with the provider, and a fee schedule can change without the bank having to change anything. So take the fee page in hand yourself shortly before your first purchase instead of lifting a figure from a review.

Watch two items that can arise separately: the stated transaction fee and the spread, meaning the gap between the buying and the selling price. The spread appears in no fee table as a percentage, yet it works like a mark-up on the price. With the offerings from Sparkassen and Volksbanken it was exactly this combination of commission and spread that made up the gap to a specialist trading platform.

Deposit protection and crypto assets: why the securities-account setting gives no cover here

Because the access sits inside the securities account, a mistaken assumption suggests itself: that crypto assets thereby fall under the same protection as cash balances and securities. That is not the case. Deposit protection covers bank balances, meaning money in an account. Securities in a custody account are segregated assets and belong to you anyway, not to the bank.

Crypto assets are neither the one nor the other. They are not a bank balance and so are not captured by deposit protection. What happens if the custodian becomes insolvent hangs on its custody model and on the legal system it is subject to. BW-Bank points out explicitly that crypto assets can be subject to extreme price swings that may lead to the total loss of the capital invested.

That is not an argument against the offering, but it is an argument for not treating the holding as safer just because it turns up next to equities and funds in the same view. The interface is shared; the legal position is not.

Crypto capital gains tax at a bank: why nothing is withheld at source

With equities and funds in the custody account of a German bank, taxation runs largely automatically: the institution withholds capital gains tax and passes it on. With crypto assets, under the law as it stands, that is different. Gains from a sale count as private disposal transactions under section 23 of the Income Tax Act, and there is no tax withheld at source.

Concretely, that means you declare the transactions yourself in your tax return, in the Anlage SO schedule. For that you need the acquisition date, acquisition cost, disposal date and disposal proceeds for each position. The bank and the provider explicitly do not provide tax advice, and a ready-made tax certificate of the kind you get in the securities business is not envisaged for this part.

Anyone holding crypto assets through several routes, say through the bank access and additionally at an exchange, should bring the records together from the start. After the fact, acquisition dates can often only be reconstructed laboriously, and those are exactly what decides tax exemption. A portfolio tracker with a tax function takes that bookkeeping off your hands. That a securities-account setting means no automatic withholding is something we already took apart on August 27 using the example of equity accounts at crypto exchanges; the direction there is reversed, the risk of confusion the same.

The December 31, 2026 cut-off: why the acquisition date counts

The taxation of crypto assets is currently being decided anew, and the timing of your purchase could become the decisive factor in it. A departmental draft from the Federal Ministry of Finance dated September 8, 2026 would treat crypto assets in future as income from capital assets, with flat-rate withholding tax regardless of the holding period. Under the draft this would capture only crypto assets acquired after December 31, 2026.

None of that is settled. The draft is in early coordination within the federal government, no bill is before the Bundestag, and the one-year holding period under section 23 of the Income Tax Act continues to apply unchanged. What is known about it we wrote up in detail on September 8 under the title "Crypto holding period and grandfathering".

For you, what follows from that is no rush to buy, but care in documenting. Record the date, quantity and price for every acquisition, whatever route you buy through. Should a cut-off date become law, this record is exactly what decides which regime applies to which position.

Bank or crypto exchange: the questions to settle before your first purchase

Access through your own bank has a real advantage: one interface, one login, a known counterpart for the rest of your investments. Against that stand points you have to check actively, because the familiar setting hides them.

cryptoticker.io compiled this assessment itself on September 10, 2026. It rests on the publicly available BW-Bank product page on the crypto cooperation and its Nextbroker page, both retrieved with HTTP 200 on that day, plus the release of September 9, 2026. Five points were checked: tradable assets, access requirements, contractual counterparty, custody and amount limits. Not verifiable were the actual level of the transaction fee, the spread and the question of whether withdrawals to an external wallet are possible; on all three the product page gives no information.

Four questions to your bank or to the provider are therefore worth asking before your first purchase: how high is the transaction fee for the order size you are planning? How wide is the spread at the moment of execution? Is a transfer to a wallet address of your own possible? And what statement do you get at the end of the year in order to declare the transactions in the Anlage SO schedule?

Checking the BW-Bank crypto securities account: what to take away

1. Settle who your counterpart is before you order. The contractual counterparty is the crypto service provider; the bank explicitly is not. Read its terms, and compare the cost frame with what a specialist trading platform charges for the same order.
2. Ask about withdrawals to an address of your own. If they are not offered, your holding stays in third-party custody permanently. Anyone who wants to hold the keys themselves needs a different route for that and a suitable hardware wallet.
3. Keep clean acquisition records from the start. No withholding at source means the burden of proof sits with you. A tax and portfolio tool collects the acquisition date and cost for each position while the data is still retrievable.

Sources to read up on: the BW-Bank product page on the crypto cooperation and the report of September 9, 2026 in IT-Finanzmagazin.

(As of September 10, 2026. This article is not investment advice. Prices and fee structures change; check the terms with the provider before you buy.)

SBF’s lawyers say he was barred from arguing customers lost nothing, and call the $11 billion forfeiture an "crushing fine."

The draft adds registration requirements for controlled trading protocols and leaves its ethics provisions largely unchanged.

OpenDesign put 13 AI models through the same design tasks. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash landed a point and a half behind GPT-6 Astra and roughly 70 times cheaper.

The ECDSA.Fail challenge cut a resource benchmark for one component of a potential quantum attack by 86%.

Head of Product Ryan Kass says the return to Coinbase Wallet reflects a broader trading strategy, with the self-custody app serving as a testing ground for new assets and experiences.

Ripple’s credit partner Clearpool abandons Ethereum exclusivity for XRPL, triggers a 1:1 token migration, and launches a 50% fee-burn scheme.

Zcash faced a surge in liquidation volume as price loses the top.

Blockstream has drawn a hard line against the hackers behind the recent Liquid Network exploit.

The unprecedented on-chain anomaly indicates that the cryptocurrency’s latest bottom may have been accumulated gradually by a single whale or a small group of large buyers.

Bitcoin and Ethereum are losing short-term momentum after their August rallies, while XRP and Shiba Inu are testing important support levels.

TLDR

• AI agents helped researchers reduce a key quantum attack resource score by 86.1%.
• The research optimized only a secp256k1 point-addition process, not a full Bitcoin private-key attack.
• IonQ estimates a complete attack would require about 1,457 logical qubits and 39 million Toffoli gates.
• Glassnode estimates 6.04 million BTC, or 30.2% of supply, has public-key exposure.
• BIP 360 could reduce some quantum risks but does not automatically protect older or already exposed coins.

AI agents helped more than 100 researchers cut the resource score for a key quantum computing task linked to Bitcoin by 86.1%, according to a paper published on September 9. The work does not show that Bitcoin has been hacked. It shows that software improvements can reduce the quantum resources needed for secp256k1 calculations.

Researchers focused on a narrow part of the attack process rather than a full private-key recovery. The result adds pressure on blockchain developers to plan for post-quantum security before fault-tolerant quantum computers become practical.

AI Agents Reduce Quantum Resource Score

Eigen Labs launched ECDSA.Fail in May to improve secp256k1 point-addition circuits. The contest measured designs by multiplying logical qubit use by average Toffoli gate count.

The score fell from 10.75 billion to 1.496 billion by July 26. One leading design used 1,151 logical qubits and about 1.3 million Toffoli gates. Later entries reduced gate counts below one million, while another design used only 813 qubits.

IonQ estimates that a complete secp256k1 attack would need about 1,457 logical qubits and 39 million Toffoli gates. Its model translates that requirement into 19,397 physical trapped-ion qubits and about 25.7 days of processing time.

Google researchers have published higher gate estimates for a full attack. Their models use about 1,200 to 1,450 logical qubits and between 70 million and 90 million Toffoli gates. ECDSA.Fail cannot be compared directly because it improves only one subroutine.

Millions of Bitcoin Already Exposed

Glassnode estimates that 6.04 million BTC, or 30.2% of supply, has public keys exposed on-chain. About 1.92 million BTC sits in directly exposed outputs, while 4.12 million BTC faces exposure linked to user behavior such as address reuse.

Another risk appears when a hidden public key becomes visible after spending. A sufficiently fast quantum computer could, in theory, derive the private key before the transaction receives confirmation.

BIP 360 proposes Pay-to-Merkle-Root outputs to reduce exposure from Taproot key-path spending. However, it does not remove the short mempool risk or move older coins automatically.

A Coinbase advisory report says about 1.7 million BTC remains in early P2PK addresses linked to Satoshi or lost wallets. Developers must decide how migration rules should treat dormant coins. Ethereum targets broad quantum resistance by December 2029, while the G7 has also urged coordinated post-quantum planning across finance under future migration plans.

The post Quantum Bitcoin Risk Changes as AI Agents Advance appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• LINK dropped from a September high near $13.70 down to about $11.56 after heavy selling.
• RSI sits at 31.58, close to oversold territory, while MACD stays bearish.
• Trading volume fell to $507.51 million and open interest slipped to $645.90 million.
• Analyst More Crypto Online flags $12.30-$13.21 as the zone to watch for a recovery.
• Santiment data shows LINK new and active addresses holding near recent peaks despite the price drop.

Chainlink’s LINK token has pulled back sharply after a strong run earlier this month. The token climbed from under $9.50 to a September high near $13.70 before sellers took over.

That rally was followed by a fast retreat. LINK has now fallen in a pattern of lower lows, landing around $11.56.

The drop has pushed LINK back into the trading range it held in late August. Traders often watch old ranges like this because buyers have defended price there before.

Momentum readings reflect the selling pressure. The Relative Strength Index sits at 31.58, close to oversold levels.

The MACD indicator has also moved further into bearish territory. Its signal line is falling and the red histogram bars are getting bigger.

Market Activity Shows Cautious Positioning

Derivatives data points to traders stepping back. CoinGlass figures show trading volume down to $507.51 million.

Open interest has slipped too, now at $645.90 million. A drop in both volume and open interest often means leveraged positions are being closed.

Analyst More Crypto Online shared a chart pointing to this move as wave (A) of a larger ABC pullback. The analyst named $12.30 to $13.21 as the first resistance zone to watch, saying a break above it could support a recovery while continued rejection would keep LINK under pressure.

Network Growth Strengthens Price Outlook

Price action has weakened, but on-chain data tells a different story. Santiment Intelligence data shows new addresses rose from around 974 per day in early August to a peak of 1,601, before settling near 1,140.

Active addresses followed a similar path, climbing from about 3,599 to a peak of 5,572 and now sitting near 4,821. Santiment Intelligence posted that this address growth looks specific to Chainlink when compared with recent Solana and Ethereum activity, pointing to steady use of the network even as the price corrects.

Address counts do have limits. They can’t show whether the same users are returning or new users are joining.

Traders are now watching the $12.30-$13.21 zone alongside RSI, MACD, and open interest for the next directional move. A steady base near current levels combined with rising volume would offer the clearest sign that buyers are stepping back in.

The post Chainlink (LINK) Price: Falls to $11.56 After September Highs Near $13.70 appeared first on Blockonomi.

TLDR

• XRP fell 3.24% to around $1.35, slipping below the $1.40 support level.
• Analyst Ali Martinez says XRP could reach $60 if it closes a monthly candle above $3.66.
• Ripple CTO David Schwartz said XRP could one day pass Bitcoin’s market value, driven by faster growth rather than a Bitcoin decline.
• The XRP Ledger’s Lending Protocol amendment is in voting, with 31.43% support so far, short of the 80% needed.
• XRPL 3.4.0 has reached its first beta milestone ahead of a planned Lending Protocol release.

XRP traded near $1.35 on Thursday, down 3.24% for the session. The drop pushed the token below $1.40, a level where buyers and sellers have been fighting for control in recent weeks.

If $1.35 fails to hold, traders are watching $1.30 as the next line of defense. A recovery would need to clear $1.40 first, then push through resistance between $1.45 and $1.50.

Analyst Ali Martinez ($XRP) laid out a longer-term case for the token. He said a monthly close above $3.66 could open the door to a $60 price, arguing that such a move would break a long pattern of failed attempts to hold gains above prior highs.

Reaching $3.66 alone would require XRP to climb almost 170% from current levels. Getting to $60 would mean a jump of close to 4,000% from where the token trades today.

XRP Price Levels To Watch

The immediate focus stays on the $1.30 to $1.50 range rather than any longer-term target. Traders are watching how price behaves around $1.40 for signs of direction.

XRP is also trading carefully ahead of new US inflation data. That report could shift expectations for interest rates, which in turn affects demand across crypto markets.

Ripple CTO David Schwartz addressed a separate question during an X Space discussion hosted by validator operator Vet ($XRP). Asked whether XRP could overtake Bitcoin in total market value, Schwartz said it was possible, but explained the path: “It wouldn’t happen from Bitcoin shrinking. It would happen from XRP growing faster than Bitcoin.” He pointed to the XRP Ledger’s speed and range of functions as reasons for potential future growth. Schwartz did not give a price target or timeline.

XRP Ledger Upgrade Progress

Away from price, the XRP Ledger is moving toward its next major upgrade. XRPL 3.4.0 will include Lending Protocol v1.1, adding to the network’s decentralized finance tools.

The current Lending Protocol amendment is open for validator voting, with 31.43% of tokens cast so far. The amendment needs 80% support to activate, so the current total does not guarantee it will pass.

The lending system would allow uncollateralized loans on the blockchain using pooled funds from a Single Asset Vault. It relies on off-chain underwriting to assess borrowers under the XLS-66 specification.

XRPLF moved the software from version 3.4.0-b0 to 3.4.0-b1 on August 24, following a merged pull request. The update did not add any new transaction type, amendment, or RPC method.

XRPL Operations is hosting an X Space on the Lending Protocol on September 11 at 1 p.m. EST. Scheduled participants include XRPL Foundation CTO Angell Denis, RippleX’s Ayo Akinyele and Jazzi Cooper, and RippleX engineer Vito Tumas.

The post XRP (XRP) Price: Falls Below $1.40 As Analyst Sets $60 Target appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Points

• In Fox News interview, Trump defended initiating the Iran conflict and expressed willingness to make the same decision
• President forecasts conflict will conclude “immediately” following November’s midterm vote
• Brent crude reached the $100 per barrel threshold Wednesday, first time since July
• American military destroyed five Iranian oil vessels; Tehran reports attacking two American destroyers
• GOP faces potential Congressional losses amid public frustration over energy prices and inflation

In a Fox News interview, Trump defended his decision to initiate military operations against Iran, stating he would “do exactly as I did” under similar circumstances. His remarks were made while traveling to Texas for the Republican Party’s initial midterm convention.

The military operation, which commenced in February through coordinated US and Israeli strikes against Iran, has now entered its seventh month. Initial presidential projections suggested the campaign would span only several weeks.

Addressing media representatives, Trump forecasted the hostilities would cease “immediately after the election” scheduled for November, contending that Iranian leadership “can’t hold out any longer.” He additionally projected that petroleum prices would “tumble downward” following the midterm vote.

The ongoing conflict has driven energy costs significantly upward. Brent crude reached $100 per barrel Wednesday, marking the first instance since July. American diesel costs similarly achieved record highs this week.

Elevated energy expenses have triggered widespread price increases for consumer goods nationwide. Economic experts warn the mounting costs may force additional interest rate adjustments.

Trump conceded that segments of his political base have expressed dissatisfaction. During the convention, he recalled: “Guys come up to me and say, ‘I wish you didn’t do the war in Iran. Now gasoline is up.'” He offered no indication of concern regarding this feedback.

The fundamental American stance maintains that Iran must be prevented from acquiring nuclear weapons capability. Tehran has consistently rejected accusations of pursuing nuclear armaments and characterizes its program as civilian in nature.

Regional Military Actions Intensify

Combat operations have grown more intense in recent days. Tuesday saw American forces eliminate five petroleum vessels connected to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps in the Gulf of Oman.

The IRGC claimed its forces struck two American naval destroyers and eight petroleum tankers in the Strait of Hormuz. US Central Command rejected assertions that its vessels sustained damage.

Iranian forces additionally deployed ballistic missiles targeting an American air installation in Jordan. Jordanian defense systems intercepted 20 incoming missiles, though CBS News sources confirmed damage to multiple US aircraft, including one A-10 and approximately eight F-15 fighters.

Wednesday evening brought reports of explosions across southern Iran. Iranian authorities attributed the sounds to maritime activity and dismissed speculation of American military strikes.

Growing Political Challenges

Trump’s public approval numbers have declined as the military campaign continues. Pressure from Republican Party members to expedite the conflict’s resolution has intensified.

The GOP confronts potential loss of Congressional control in the November 3 midterm elections. Historical patterns demonstrate the president’s party typically surrenders seats during midterm voting cycles.

The post Trump Projects Iran Conflict to Conclude Following November Elections as Crude Reaches $100 appeared first on Blockonomi.

Key Takeaways

• Morgan Stanley cut Novo Nordisk’s rating from Equal-weight to Underweight while maintaining a 250 Danish crown price target
• Shares declined approximately 2.4% during early Copenhagen market hours
• Semaglutide represents 75% of the company’s revenue and confronts significant patent expiration challenges in the early-to-mid 2030s
• Analysts project 2-3% revenue and EBIT expansion in 2027, trailing broader European pharmaceutical sector expectations
• Limited positive catalysts identified before the company’s September 21 capital markets presentation

Morgan Stanley delivered a bearish assessment of Novo Nordisk with an Underweight downgrade, triggering an immediate market reaction. Shares fell roughly 2.4% in Copenhagen trading after the announcement.

Novo Nordisk A/S, NVO

The analyst team headed by Thibault Boutherin argued that the pharmaceutical giant’s present market valuation fails to account for a lackluster medium-term expansion trajectory. Their price objective remains unchanged at 250 Danish crowns, suggesting potential downside exceeding 10% from recent closing levels.

Central to the bearish thesis is semaglutide, the compound powering blockbuster medications Ozempic and Wegovy. This single molecule generated 75% of the company’s entire revenue stream in 2026.

This heavy concentration poses significant challenges during the early-to-mid 2030s timeframe, when semaglutide’s patent protection expires across Europe and the United States. Morgan Stanley’s financial models indicate the drug will still represent 59% of total sales in 2031, precisely when exclusivity loss begins impacting revenues.

Underwhelming Expansion Trajectory

Morgan Stanley anticipates 2-3% revenue and EBIT expansion for 2027, aligning closely with market consensus estimates. However, between 2027 and 2030, analysts forecast just a 4% compound annual growth rate for both top-line and EBIT metrics.

These projections lag considerably behind the 4% revenue and 7% EBIT growth rates Morgan Stanley expects from the wider European pharmaceutical industry during the identical timeframe.

While the bank acknowledges Novo’s oral obesity product pipeline could achieve $10 billion in annual sales by 2031, analysts cautioned this milestone “will not be enough to offset pricing and competitive headwinds.”

A proprietary Morgan Stanley physician survey encompassing 200 primary care practitioners revealed increasing GLP-1 medication adoption overall. Yet the research simultaneously highlighted anticipated market share erosion for Novo during the coming 18 months, driven by Eli Lilly’s existing portfolio and its forthcoming retatrutide candidate, projected to launch in 2027.

Trading Multiple and Upcoming Investor Event

From a valuation perspective, Novo currently trades at 12.5 times projected 2027 earnings. This represents a 7% discount relative to European large-cap pharmaceutical comparables, yet commands a 35% premium versus global competitors confronting comparable patent expiration challenges, including Sanofi and GSK.

Morgan Stanley specifically highlighted this valuation disparity, emphasizing the premium appears “more pronounced” compared to GSK at 10x and Sanofi at 8x multiples.

The company’s capital markets day is slated for September 21. Morgan Stanley anticipates management will reinforce its oral obesity therapeutic strategy and deliver progress reports on business development initiatives spanning MASH and chronic kidney disease indications.

The research team indicated they perceive “limited scope for major announcements” during this investor presentation.

One scenario that could support share price appreciation would involve oral obesity medications capturing greater patient market penetration than current forecasts anticipate and demonstrating superior resilience against competitive pressures and generic entry compared to existing models.

Morgan Stanley’s Underweight rating classification signals analyst expectations that the stock will underperform relative to sector peers moving forward.

The post Novo Nordisk (NVO) Stock Drops After Morgan Stanley Downgrade on Patent Cliff Concerns appeared first on Blockonomi.

Blockstream has drawn a firm line against the party holding the Bitcoin taken from the Liquid Network and has stated that it will not pay a ransom for the return of the stolen funds.

In its latest statement, Adam Back-led blockchain tech company rejected the claim that the incident qualifies as responsible disclosure, while arguing that taking assets without authorization and then withholding them is theft, not white-hat activity.

“Transactions Do Not Disappear”

Blockstream said it had engaged in good faith to recover the stolen user funds, but added that those efforts should not be taken as acceptance of the hackers’ actions or their demands. While rejecting the demand for a bounty, the company said it would not set a precedent where open-source developers are forced to pay a ransom over software built for the Bitcoin community.

“Bitcoin is hard money and can’t be minted without costs; Bitcoin doesn’t haircut users to pay a ransom.”

Blockstream said there was still an opportunity for those holding the stolen BTC to return it and resolve the situation responsibly. If the funds are not returned, however, the company would pursue every lawful avenue available, including working with law enforcement, exchanges, service providers, and forensic specialists to trace the assets and identify those responsible. It also stressed that Bitcoin transactions remain visible by design, meaning the funds and the evidence associated with their movement do not simply disappear.

No Easy Way Out

The hackers had previously called Blockstream “delusional, greedy, and arrogant” over its handling of security. Samson Mow later warned that they may be underestimating the consequences of their actions. The former CSO of Blockstream said that the company’s willingness to communicate with them through PGP was already a courtesy and questioned whether publicly admitting to taking the assets and then demanding a bounty was a wise move. He also said the group had left behind more clues than it might realize.

The incident began on September 6, when roughly 4,000 BTC was withdrawn from Liquid’s Federation wallet. The alleged white-hat hackers later returned 3,400 units, while about 598 remained in their possession.

Meanwhile, Liquid has now entered another recovery phase. Block production and transactions have resumed, although peg-outs remain disabled. The network said internal and external teams are continuing testing, AI-assisted code scanning, and monitoring, while Liquid node operators have been told to update to Elements v23.3.4.

The post ‘We Will Not Pay’: Blockstream Rejects 10% Bounty Demand From Liquid Hackers appeared first on CryptoPotato.

The Digital Asset Market CLARITY Act is going to go through a very important Senate test on September 15th after more than a year of legislative work on the bill. The House passed H.R. 3633 by a vote of 294- 134 in July 2025, and the Senate Banking Committee advanced its version 15-9 in May 2026.

Lawmakers later merged the work from the Banking and Agricultural committees, while Senate Majority Leader John Thune filed cloture before the August recess, setting September 15 as the next major hurdle.

The vote is not final passage. Senators are basically deciding whether or not to proceed with the debate, and cloture requires 60 votes, so Republicans need Democrats or support from independent seats. Senate Republicans have now released further revisions after recess negotiations. They said that the bill includes more than 115 Democratic “wins,” with new fraud measures and changes for certain decentralized finance (DeFi) platforms, as well as clear crypto authority for credit unions.

The CEO of Coinbase, Brian Armstrong, urged a “yes” vote, noting the company’s previous must-have concerns have been resolved as well.

That said, failure to reach 60 votes could seriously weaken momentum behind the most advanced attempt of Congress at what many see as a comprehensive crypto market-structure framework. But why is that? Well, in this article, we will walk you through the three most important things that the CLARITY Act does for crypto.

The SEC-CFTC Divide is the Core of the Legislation

CLARITY is fundamentally about making sure who regulates what. The framework is designed to preserve the Security and Exchange Commission’s authority over securties and certain transactions involving fundraising. At the same time, though, it als expands the Commodity Futures Trading Commission’s role over spot digital-commodity markets and intermediaries.

The text also introduces what is referred to as “ancillary assets.” In essence, these are network tokens whose value may depend on entrepreneurial or managerial efforts, while treating the tokens themselves as commodities and requiring specific disclosures.

Those obligations can potentially end when the relevant managerial efforts cease. In practice, the proposal seeks to separate the securities-law treatment of fundraising transactions (ICO, STOs, IEOs, NFT launches, etc) from the later regulatory status of the token itself. This in itself addresses one of the industry’s longest-running legal uncertainties.

DeFi Protection Comes With a Test of Decentralization

The second issue that the bill seeks to address is the field of decentralized finance and self-custody. The latest revisions target non-decentralized DeFi protocols. This means that these are DeFi protocols that appear decentralized while identifiable parties retain meaningful control, with CFTC registration requirements for relevant spot digital-commodity activity.

The broader framework looks at discretion, control, as well as the ability to censor operations when making the call whether a protocol is decentralized or not. At the same time, however, it protects certain software developers and network participants whose role is limited to software development or validating transactions. Moreover, it also states that federal agencies generally cannot stop individuals from using self-hosted wallets.

The goal here is to regulate the entities that actually control financia services without necessarily treating open-source code or truly decentralized infrastructure like centralized exchanges by default.

Crypto Exchanges Would Face a Formal Federal Regulation

Last but definitely not least, the companies through which most Americans actually buy and sell crypto are also under consideration for regulation. The CLARITY Act would bring digital-commodity exchanges, brokers, and dealers into a defined federal registration and supervision regime. This comes as opposed to leaving them to operate under the current combination of state requirements, enforcement actions, as well as confusing and oftentimes overlapping federal authority.

The framework includes requirements for both customer protection and market integrity. The latest Senate proposal also applies the Bank Secrecy Act obligations to relevant cryptocurrency intermediaries.

In essence, this means that anti-money-laundering programs, customer identification, reporting of suspicious activity, as well as sanction compliance would become integral and explicit part of the federal framework.

The legislation also calls for additional disclosures and protections intended to address insider abuse, fraude, and treatment of customer assets.

This is the reason for which the CLARITY Act represetns more than just a decision over whether individual tokens are securities or commodities – it could establish the critical federal operating rules for the entire crypto market.

The post The 3 Most Important Things to Know About the CLARITY Act appeared first on CryptoPotato.

Senate Republicans have released updated CLARITY Act text ahead of the September 15 procedural vote, adding new rules for non-decentralized DeFi protocols and clarifying how credit unions can deal in crypto.

The changes reflect weeks of negotiation over the August recess, but they leave untouched the ethics provisions that have stalled Democratic support for the bill.

New DeFi and Credit Union Language

The updated bill requires non-decentralized DeFi protocols, platforms that market themselves as decentralized without actually functioning that way, to register with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission (CFTC).

That requirement mirrors Section 10301 of the Banking Committee’s portion of the bill, although crypto developer Roman Storm questioned the phrasing on X, asking how something billed as DeFi could be “non-decentralized.”

The new text also limits the DeFi provisions to spot or cash digital commodity transactions, a change aimed at addressing concerns some Native American tribes had raised about blockchain-based prediction markets. Credit unions, meanwhile, gained clearer authority to deal in crypto under the revised language.

Republican Senator Cynthia Lummis of Wyoming, who has championed the bill, described the revisions as the product of bipartisan negotiations and wrote that the updated text contains more than 100 changes requested by Democrats.

In another post, she put the figure at more than 115 Democratic “wins,” including a felony bar on fraudsters, $150 million for the CFTC and crackdowns on platforms such as Binance.

“Now they need to vote for the bill they built,” she wrote. “Anything less is walking away from their own work.”

Those changes come just days before the Senate is scheduled to vote on whether to invoke cloture on the motion to proceed. The September 15 vote requires 60 senators, leaving Republicans dependent on Democratic support.

Ethics Talks Remain the Bottleneck

The latest changes do not alter the ethics section or the bill’s stablecoin yield provisions, and that matters because ethics has been one of the biggest obstacles to Democratic support.

Yesterday, Coinbase CEO Brian Armstrong backed a “yes” vote and pointed out that lawmakers had resolved the issues his company previously considered must-have changes. He also described the ethics negotiations as one of the last matters to settle.

Democrats, however, have pushed for provisions requiring elected officials to divest relevant crypto interests or place them in blind trusts. The issue became more urgent after some legislators from that party called for scrutiny into President Donald Trump’s crypto dealings, from which he earned $1.2 billion, including from his Official Trump (TRUMP) meme coin.

However, Lummis has argued that failure to pass the bill would not be because of ethics, but because Democrats refused to accept a bipartisan compromise. Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent, in a September 9 post on X, also urged senators to keep negotiating and advance the legislation.

As things stand, the revised text settles some disputes while leaving the most politically sensitive part of the negotiations unchanged, and the upcoming vote will show whether those compromises are enough to get the bill moving.

The post Senate Republicans Update CLARITY Act Before September 15 Vote appeared first on CryptoPotato.

[PRESS RELEASE – Dubai, United Arab Emirates, September 10th, 2026]

The appointment brings a veteran of regulated digital-asset and brokerage businesses to a firm turning its focus from growth alone to the foundations that sustain it.

Tag Markets today announced the appointment of Craig Lund as Chief Executive Officer. Lund will lead the company’s executive team and its next phase of development, working alongside the firm’s founders and existing stakeholders.

Lund brings more than fifteen years of experience across financial services, regulated digital assets, operations and governance, with senior leadership roles at Merrill Lynch, M2, MidChains, BitOasis, and Property Finder. He has helped take multiple regulated financial businesses from formation to licensing across several jurisdictions, has led teams numbering in the hundreds, and has worked within organisations responsible for several billion dollars in trading volume. His experience spans risk, regulatory engagement, cross-border settlement, product infrastructure and the building of executive teams.

At BitOasis, he was part of the leadership team that scaled the business many times over and contributed to securing one of the first in-principle approvals granted by Abu Dhabi Global Market to a digital asset exchange and custodian. At MidChains, he helped build an over-the-counter desk that reached multi-billion-dollar volume within its first year. At M2, he led the group operational structure that took a globally regulated exchange and custody platform from a standstill to launch within months, under multiple global regulated frameworks.

The appointment comes as Tag Markets turns its attention to the part of a brokerage that clients experience most directly. Spreads and platforms are compared in an afternoon; a client’s view of a firm is formed by how quickly a withdrawal is processed and how promptly a support question is answered. Lund’s brief places those measures at the centre of the firm’s priorities and treats them as standards to be defined, measured and continuously improved.

“A broker earns trust in the moments a client feels, not in the ones it advertises,” Lund said. “The next chapter for Tag Markets is defined less by how fast it grows than by how well it runs. My focus is on the operating discipline, the governance and the client experience that let a firm grow across markets without losing the confidence of the people it serves.”

Three priorities define the agenda. The first is operating discipline: clear operating standards and escalation thresholds across the business, so that decisions are taken at the right level and are visible after the fact. The second is the resilience of execution, from order routing and pricing through to the controls that govern how changes reach live trading environments. The third is client service treated as management information, with feedback recorded, measured and reviewed so that patterns are seen early and acted on.

As Tag Markets grows across markets, the demands on its internal systems, its governance and its regulatory engagement grow with it. Lund’s background at the intersection of regulated finance, operational scale and technology reflects the capabilities that matter most at that stage.

About Tag Markets

Tag Markets is an online trading services provider offering access to foreign exchange, commodities, indices and other markets through leading trading platforms. Tag Markets is the trading name of “T.M. Financials Ltd”, incorporated in Mauritius (Company No. C185265), and regulated by the Financial Services Commission of Mauritius as an Investment Dealer (License No. GB21026474). Further information is available at tagmarkets.com.

The post Tag Markets Names Craig Lund Chief Executive Officer appeared first on CryptoPotato.

XRP’s weekly Super Trend indicator flipped bullish on August 17, after the token rallied about 70% from $0.98 to $1.70.

The catch, according to analyst ChartNerd, is that this exact signal has marked local tops before deep pullbacks in every previous cycle going back to 2019, and XRP is already stalling at the resistance level that decided those earlier setups.

XRP’s Bullish Signal Meets Resistance

ChartNerd’s analysis centers on what happened after XRP hit roughly $0.98 and then recovered. The token moved about 70% toward $1.70, where it ran into the 50-week EMA, currently around $1.52. At the same time, the token has been trading between that resistance and the 20-week EMA near $1.29 to $1.30.

“Whilst beneath the 50 and above the 20, we’re simply compressing,” ChartNerd said, describing the recent price action as a period of chop while traders wait for a clearer direction.

That caution comes from XRP’s earlier cycle history. In 2022, it rallied about 90% from its cycle low before a bullish Super Trend flip appeared around the 50-week EMA. The move was followed by a 45% correction.

In 2019, another bullish flip during the bear market was followed by a 56% correction, and after the 2020 cycle low, XRP also printed a bullish flip before falling 32%.

ChartNerd argues this pattern has appeared often enough to warrant caution. “Bullish super trends usually mark local tops,” the analyst said, while stressing that historical behavior does not guarantee the same outcome this time.

He also placed a greater structural change around $1.90, noting that XRP would need to clear the $1.50 to $1.90 zone before the move toward its previous high looks more convincing.

A short-term push above $1.52 is still possible, the analyst said. But even a close above the 50-week EMA would not automatically remove the historical warning.

Price Has Stayed Choppy This Week

As CryptoPotato reported earlier, XRP dipped toward $1.39 during one leg of Bitcoin’s recent slide before buyers stepped back in to push it to $1.44.

At the time of writing, it had gone back down close to 4% in the last 24 hours and was again trading near $1.38, according to CoinGecko. It is up 1.5% over the past week but down more than 53% from a year ago, and it also remains about 62% below its all-time high of $3.65 from July 2025.

Bitcoin has been chopping between $77,600 and $80,000 over the past few days, and XRP’s swings have largely tracked that back and forth rather than moving on their own.

The Ripple token’s futures volume also picked up in August, with trading across the three biggest exchanges topping $64 billion, the busiest month in half a year.

Spot XRP ETFs kept adding money too, although the pace slowed a lot, with weekly inflows dropping to just under $19 million last week after bringing in more than $110 million the week before. So far this week, SoSoValue data shows net inflows have hit about $13.83 million.

The post XRP Faces Key Test as Historical Pattern Points to Possible Pullback appeared first on CryptoPotato.