House passes first major regulation for crypto industry
For years, regulators have wrestled with how to treat the crypto industry, whose value has swelled to $3.7 trillion but has largely remained a niche investment undertaken by investors with an appetite for risk. The House's vote, however, means the federal government is close to cementing its first rules for how financial institutions can issue crypto tokens — specifically, a less volatile class known as 'stablecoins,' which are typically pegged to the value of the U.S. dollar.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Forbes
14 minutes ago
- Forbes
To Win Or Not To Win The AI Race. The Question To End All Questions
WASHINGTON, DC - JULY 23: U.S. President Donald Trump displays a signed executive order during the ... More "Winning the AI Race" summit hosted by All‑In Podcast and Hill & Valley Forum at the Andrew W. Mellon Auditorium on July 23, 2025 in Washington, DC. Trump signed executive orders related to his Artificial Intelligence Action Plan during the event. (Photo by) When President Donald Trump announced Winning the AI Race: America's AI Action Plan yesterday, he said something we should all remember: 'America is the country that started the AI race. And as president of the United States, I'm here today to declare that America is going to win it.' These are important words to remember because it may be the last time, Trump and his Big Tech partners in Silicon Valley acknowledge that AI wasn't always a question of winning or losing a race. To Win Or Not To Win Is Not The Only Question Once AI was a philosophical question – one that religious and spiritual thinkers from ancient cultures asked to better understand the laws of nature. Later it became a scientific question – one that English mathematicians and computer scientitsts asked to transcend the laws of nature. And lately, it has become everyone's question – one that ethicists, policy makers, journalists, educators, you, and I ask to protect the nature in and around us that AI threatens to replace. But – Trump claims – AI is no longer a question. It's a race. A race started by America that America is going to win. Why? Because, as Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, puts it, 'winning the AI race is non-negotiable.' And once something is non-negotiable, all questions about it ends. So what are the questions America's AI Action Plan is designed to end? And why is it important that we keep asking them? The AI Race Ends Questions About Regulations The plan identifies over 90 Federal policy actions across three pillars – Accelerating Innovation, Building American AI Infrastructure, and Leading in International Diplomacy and Security. One key policy is enabling innovation and adoption by 'removing onerous Federal regulations that hinder AI development and deployment, and seek private sector input on rules to remove.' In yesterday's summit Trump commented on this initiative, saying the AI industry is 'a beautiful baby that's born.' 'We have to grow that baby and let that baby thrive. We can't stop it. We can't stop it with politics, we can't stop it with foolish rules,' Trump said. Talking about AI development as something that cannot be stopped is one thing. Comparing the tech industry with a baby whose growth and well-being we are responsible for is another. And maybe that's where our questions should start: Where our understanding of nature meets our understanding of technology. Is it the same to be 'born to think' and to be 'built to think'? Do babies and AI technologies follow the same laws of nature? Do they have the same constraints? And can the questions asked by philosophers, religious thinkers, and scientists in the past guide us in navigating the need for restrictions and regulations in the future? At the AI Action Plan summit, President Trump said the tech industry is 'a beautiful baby" that we ... More have to grow and let thrive. (Photo by Joe Mahoney) The AI Race Ends Questions About Existential Risks According to the White House's website, 'winning the AI race will usher in a new golden age of human flourishing, economic competitiveness, and national security for the American people.' But it doesn't say what this golden age of human flourishing should look like. In fact, the Trump administration's understanding of AI seems to built on the idea that technology can and should be neutral. No human ideas and ideals. Just pure innovation. Or, as it says in the plan's 'upholding free speech in frontier models' section: Federal procurement guidelines must be updated to 'ensure that the government only contracts with frontier language model developers who ensure that their systems are objective and free from top-down idealogical bias.' But this idea that technology can and should be neutral can and should be questioned. For decades the developers of first the internet and then social media have promised us free speech and systems that are objective and free from top-down idealogical bias. And for decades, we have seen an increase in mental health problems caused by misinformation and polarization. So, maybe that's the questions we must ask: How does it impact humans to think and talk about technology as something that doesn't impact humans? Is it possible to let the tech industry grow and thrive and at the same time take responsibility for human growth and well-being? Or will a country that prioritizes to be front runners in building technological systems eventually lose sight of what it takes to build human systems, e.g. in terms of education, health, and ultimately democracy? The AI Race Ends Questions About Global Collaboration 'Whether we like it or not, we're suddenly engaged in a fast-paced competition to build and define this groundbreaking technology that will determine so much about the future of civilization itself,' Trump said at the AI Action Plan event. To prepare for this future, the government will partner with US tech companies to make 'full stack AI export packages' — AI models, hardware and software — available to American ally countries. As reported by CNN, this partnership aims at making US technology the global standard, something Silicon Valley leaders have called for to ensure the United States remains an AI leader. But if AI really is this 'groundbreaking technology that will determine so much about the future of civilization itself', other countries are not looking to the US for a 'full stack AI export package'. And they are certainly not looking to Silicon Valley for global leadership and standards. Dealing with a groundbreaking technology that will determine the future of civilization itself calls for everyone to work together. And that calls for all of us to ask: Should staying ahead of China be the top priority for the American administration right now? Or does AI call for an intergovernmental organization like the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) that promotes the safe, secure and peaceful use of nuclear technology? Established in 1957, IAEA was not influenced by Big Tech. The Agency's genesis was President Eisenhower's 'Atoms for Peace' address to the General Assembly of the United Nations on 8 December 1953. Is that what the world needs from the president of the United States? Not a declaration that America is going to win a race it started itself. And not a full stack AI export package. But an 'AI for Peace' address that crystallizes the hope that the groundbreaking development of AI 'may lead to the unifying of the entire divided world' (Eisenhower's words about the splitting of the atom)? To win or not to win the AI race is not the only question. There are many questions and none of them should be answered by one president of one country. Least of all in a plan designed to be non-negotiable.
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Fine Print: ETFs Born in Banner Year May Lack Staying Power
From leveraged funds that invest only in Robinhood to products built to combat anti-semitism, exchange-traded funds are having a banner year. ETFs — investment vehicles known for their low costs, tax efficiencies and transparency — had collected $540 billion in new money, and issuers had launched 464 new funds, through the first six months of 2025, according to market researcher Morningstar. The industry is on track to launch a record 726 funds by the end of the year. Issuers are pumping out funds to meet investor demand, but there's a growing risk that many of the new ETFs will have short shelf lives because they serve very specific purposes or incorporate traditionally niche investing strategies. 'If that purpose falls out of favor and assets dwindle, it may be difficult for the ETF sponsor to keep the lights on,' said Zachary Evens, Morningstar research analyst. 'As the space gets saturated, only a relative few will likely see sustained success.' READ ALSO: Tariffs 'The World Can Live With': US-Japan Trade Pact Pushes Markets to Record Highs and Amazon, Meta Wear AI-mbitions on Their Wrists Fund on the Bun Low-cost funds with broad market exposure typically have the most assets under management and are the most popular with new investors. However, so few of them have launched this year that they're almost being seen as novel in the current ETF landscape. 'Perhaps Vanguard and [Charles] Schwab's continued push into very-low-cost bond strategies is unique amongst the sea of leveraged, covered call and buffer ETF launches,' Evens told The Daily Upside. The Morningstar data showed: First Trust, BlackRock's iShares and Graniteshares were among the top issuers in the first half of 2025, launching 23, 20 and 19 funds, respectively. Plenty of the new ETFs have also been fairly costly. The average expense ratio of 2025 ETF launches is 0.74%, much higher than all ETFs' average expense ratio of 0.6%. Active-ish: Many ETFs launched this year are being labeled as 'active,' meaning a fund manager is at the helm, regularly making investment decisions in the hopes of outperforming a benchmark instead of just mirroring it. That title is a bit of a misnomer, however, as some of those funds are more reliant on algorithms than traditional discretionary strategies, Evens said. They're only being called active because they don't track an index. 'Managers essentially have a formula for how to execute a strategy, removing much of the judgement or discretion associated with traditional stock-picking funds,' he said. This post first appeared on The Daily Upside. To receive delivering razor sharp analysis and perspective on all things finance, economics, and markets, subscribe to our free The Daily Upside newsletter. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
36 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Crowded by EV Rivals, Tesla Preps For Critical Earnings Report
For what feels like the third or fourth time in a row now, Tesla is gearing up for what may be the most important earnings call in its history. The electric vehicle maker reports after the bell today, holding its first call with analysts and investors at the dawn of a new era that finds the company squeezed between increased competition and a high-stakes feud involving its enigmatic CEO and the US federal government. At stake are billions in lucrative tax credits. Buckle up, things could get pretty bumpy. READ ALSO: Tariffs 'The World Can Live With': US-Japan Trade Pact Pushes Markets to Record Highs and Amazon, Meta Wear AI-mbitions on Their Wrists Credit Score After something of a shareholder mutiny earlier this year sparked by his divided attention while serving as an aide to President Trump, Elon Musk has seemingly quelled the critics. Now, Tesla must confront its myriad headwinds. First and foremost: The regulatory credits Tesla sells to combustion-engine carmakers to offset their tailpipe emissions. Selling the credits has been big business for Tesla, generating more than $10 billion in revenue since 2019 and accounting for a substantial portion of its free cash flow in 2024. Recent legislation, however, eliminates the hefty fines that traditional automakers face for failing to reach emissions standards, thus reducing the demand for Tesla's carbon credits. Tesla's credit sales already dipped in the first quarter, generating revenue of just $595 million compared with $692 million in the final quarter of 2024. Analysts at William Blair and Co. recently projected that revenue in the category might fall by 75% next year, and be virtually eliminated by 2027. Analysts at Piper Sandler, meanwhile, are slightly more bullish, recently projecting that 'Tesla will still book around $3B in credits this year, followed by $2.3B in 2026.' Many legacy automakers have long-term contracts for carbon credits from Tesla. Still, those same legacy automakers are suddenly catching up to Tesla in the EV realm: While Tesla remains the EV king in the US, its sales are shrinking just as rivals' are growing. The Automotive News Data Center estimates that Tesla sold 125,000 EVs in the US in the second quarter, down almost 17% year-over-year (Tesla doesn't break down its delivery figures by region). GM, meanwhile, reports that it sold 46,280 EVs in the second quarter and 78,167 EVs so far this year, representing a 111% increase from 2024. That puts GM's domestic EV market share at around 13%, while most estimates peg Tesla's once-dominant US market share at just 43% now. 'GM is quietly building trust while Elon burns it,' Paul Waatti, director of industry analysis for AutoPacific, recently told USA Today. Bleep Bloop: Still, Tesla has a sky-high forward price-to-earnings ratio for a reason. Thus far, at least, Musk has been able to sell investors on a future of self-driving cars and robotics. A robotaxi pilot program launched in Austin, Texas, earlier this summer. 'Outside of guidance, the market will likely be focusing on the robotaxi business, which had to navigate a slew of weather problems,' David Wagner, head of equity and portfolio manager at Aptus Capital Advisors, told The Daily Upside. 'The company has a 'hopes and dreams' multiple, so anything focusing on [autonomous vehicles], robotics and the other innovative products should be the focal point.' This post first appeared on The Daily Upside. To receive delivering razor sharp analysis and perspective on all things finance, economics, and markets, subscribe to our free The Daily Upside newsletter. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
